THE  BOARD  OF  MISSIONARY  PREPARATl 


REPORT  OF  A CONFERENCE  ON 
THE  PREPARATION  OF  ORDAINED 
MISSIONARIES,  HELD  IN  NEW 
YORK,  DECEMBER  1-2,  1914 


Price  10  Cents 


I 

\ 


j 


( 


I 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/preparationofordOOboar 


REPORT  OF  A CONFERENCE  OF  THE 
‘^BOARD  OF  MISSIONARY  PREPARA- 
TION WITH  THE  REPRESENTATIVES 
OF  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGES  AND 
SEMINARIES  AND  OF  FOREIGN  MIS- 
SION BOARDS  OF  NORTH  AMERICA 


HELD  IN 

NEW  YORK  CITY 
DECEMBER  1-2,  1914 


EDITED  BY 

Frank  K.  Sanders,  Ph.D. 

DIRECTOR 


Published  by  Order  of  The  Board 
25  Madison  Avenue,  New  York 


REPORT  OF  THE  CONFERENCE  OF  THE  BOARD 
OF  MISSIONARY  PREPARATION  WITH  REP- 
RESENTATIVES OF  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGES 
AND  SEMINARIES  AND  OF  FOREIGN  MISSION 
BOARDS  IN  NORTH  AMERICA 

With  the  hope  of  reaching  a general  consensus  of  opinion 
with  reference  to  the  problems  involved  in  the  preparation 
of  ordained  men  for  efficient  missionary  service,  the  Board 
of  Missionary  Preparation  called  a conference  for  Decem- 
ber 1 and  2,  1914,  at  25  Madison  Avenue,  New  York  City, 
the  headquarters  for  the  united  work  of  the  Foreign  Mis- 
sion Boards  of  North  America,  to  which  were  invited  rep- 
resentatives of  all  the  institutions  affording  theological 
instruction,  and  of  all  the  Foreign  Mission  Boards  and  of 
all  the  sending  societies  in  the  United  States  and  Canada. 

The  Conference  was  attended  by  one  hundred  and  one 
delegates.  Thirty-seven  theological  institutions,  five  other 
institutions  interested  in  the  training  of  missionaries,  and 
twenty-nine  Foreign  Mission  Boards  and  co-operating  or- 
ganizations were  represented.  There  were  also  present 
eight  missionaries  on  furlough  and  twenty-nine  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation.  The  roster 
of  delegates  will  be  found  on  pages  52  to  56. 

The  Conference  was  called  to  order  at  ten  o’clock  on 
Tuesday,  December  1st,  by  the  chairman  of  the  Board  of 
Missionary  Preparation,  Reverend  President  William  Doug- 
las Mackenzie,  D.D.,  of  the  Hartford  Seminary  Foundation, 
Hartford,  Connecticut,  who  acted  throughout  the  Confer- 
ence as  its  presiding  officer.  The  morning  session  was 
introduced  by  an  impressive  service  of  devotion  led  by  the 
Reverend  Bishop  William  F.  Oldham,  D.D.,  Secretary  of 
the  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church.  The  chairman  then  addressed  the  Conference, 

1 


outlining  the  history  of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Prepara- 
tion and  explaining  the  purposes  for  which  the  Conference 
had  been  called. 

A foundation  for  the  discussions  of  the  day  was  laid 
by  Dr.  Robert  E.  Speer,  Corresponding  Secretary  of  the 
Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in 
the  United  States,  in  his  presentation  of  the  “Present  Con- 
sensus of  Opinion  Regarding  the  Preparation  Necessary  for 
Ordained  Missionaries.” 

The  first  general  discussion  centered  upon  the  theme, 
“What  Courses  ofifered  in  the  Standard  Curriculum  of 
Theological  Seminaries  and  Colleges  contribute  directly  to 
the  Preparation  of  the  Ordained  Missionary?”  This  theme 
was  introduced  by  the  Reverend  Professor  O.  E.  Brown, 
D.D.,  of  Vanderbilt  University,  Nashville,  Tennessee.  Its 
discussion  was  opened  by  the  Reverend  William  I.  Cham- 
berlain, Ph.D.,  Foreign  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Foreign 
Missions  of  the  Reformed  Church  in  America,  and  by  the 
Reverend  Professor  William  D.  Schermerhorn,  D.D.,  of 
Garrett  Biblical  Institute,  Evanston,  111.,  and  continued  by 
the  Reverend  James  L.  Barton,  D.D.,  of  Boston,  Mass.; 
Reverend  Dean  William  H.  Allison,  Ph.D.,  of  Colgate  Theo- 
logical Seminary;  Reverend  James  Endicott,  D.D.,  of  To- 
ronto; Reverend  Arthur  M.  Sherman,  of  Hangkow,  China; 
Reverend  Horace  E.  Coleman,  of  Tokyo,  Japan;  Reverend 
W.  B.  Anderson,  D.D.,  of  Philadelphia;  Mr.  J.  C.  Robbins, 
of  the  Student  Volunteer  Movement;  Reverend  Dean  Wil- 
bor  F.  Tillett,  D.D.,  of  the  Vanderbilt  University  Depart- 
ment of  the  Bible,  Nashville,  Tenn.,  and  Dr.  John  R.  Mott, 
chairman  of  the  Continuation  Committee  of  the  World  Mis- 
sionary Conference. 

The  second  general  discussion  was  upon  the  theme 
“What  Additional  Courses  for  Special  Missionary  Training 
are  essential  for  the  Ordained  Missionary  if  he  is  to  be  ade- 
quately prepared  for  this  Work?”  It  was  introduced  by  the 

2 


Reverend  James  L.  Barton,  D.D.,  Corresponding  Secretary 
of  the  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Mis- 
sions. The  discussion  of  Dr.  Barton’s  paper  was  opened 
by  the  Reverend  Bishop  William  F.  Oldham,  D.D.,  and 
Reverend  Professor  Harlan  P.  Beach,  D.D.,  of  the  Yale 
School  of  Religion  at  New  Haven,  Connecticut.  Further 
discussion  was  postponed  until  the  end  of  the  formal 
program. 

The  third  general  theme  was  “Is  it  Reasonable  to  expect 
a Theological  Seminary  or  College  to  provide  the  Special 
Training  necessary  for  the  Ordained  Missionary  in  addition 
to  the  Regular  Theological  Curriculum  ?”  It  was  introduced 
by  the  Reverend  Professor  Ernest  D.  Burton,  D.D.,  of  the 
Theological  Faculty  of  the  University  of  Chicago.  Its  dis- 
cussion was  opened  by  the  Reverend  Principal  T.  R. 
O’Meara,  LL.D.,  of  Wyclitfe  College,  Toronto,  and  fur- 
thered by  Reverend  George  Drach,  General  Secretary  of  the 
Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the  General  Council  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  North  America. 

The  last  theme  for  general  discussion  was  “If  it  be  the 
Function  of  a Theological  Seminary  or  College  to  provide 
this  Special  Training;  (1)  Shall  the  Curriculum  be  so  modi- 
fied that  the  Missionary  Candidate  may  secure  the  Special 
Missionary  Training  within  the  three  Years  ordinarily  de- 
voted to  Theological  Study,  or  (2)  Shall  a Fourth  Year  be 
devoted  exclusively  to  special  Missionary  Training?”  This 
theme  was  introduced  by  the  Reverend  Professor  Charles  R. 
Erdman,  D.D.,  of  the  Presbyterian  Theological  Seminary  at 
Princeton,  New  Jersey,  and  discussed  by  Reverend  Professor 
Edward  W.  Capen,  Ph.D.,  Secretary  of  the  Kennedy  School 
of  Missions,  Hartford,  Connecticut. 

A general  discussion  followed  of  the  whole  series  of 
questions  raised  by  the  preceding  papers  and  discussions. 
In  this  participated  the  Reverend  President  Augustus 
Schultze,  L.H.D.,  of  the  Moravian  College  and  Theological 
Seminary,  at  Bethlehem,  Penna. ; Reverend  Principal  James 

3 


Smyth,  D.D.,  of  the  Wesleyan  Theological  College  of  Mon- 
treal; President  Addie  Grace  Wardle,  M.A.,  of  the  Cincin- 
nati Missionary  Training  School;  Reverend  Professor  Ed- 
mund D.  Soper,  D.D.,  of  Drew  Theological  Seminary, 
Madison,  New  Jersey;  Mr.  Fennell  P,  Turner,  General  Sec- 
retary of  the  Student  Volunteer  Movement  for  Foreign 
Missions;  Reverend  Professor  T.  H.  P.  Sailer,  Ph.D.,  of 
Teachers’  College  at  Columbia  University;  Reverend  Pro- 
fessor George  L.  Robinson,  Ph.D.,  of  McCormick  Theolog- 
ical Seminary  at  Chicago ; Professor  Duncan  B.  Macdonald, 
Ph.D.,  of  Hartford  Theological  Seminary;  Reverend  Presi- 
dent Wilbert  W.  White,  Ph.D.,  of  the  Bible  Teachers’  Train- 
ing School  of  New  York  City;  Reverend  President  Milton 
G.  Evans,  D.D.,  of  Crozer  Theological  Seminary  at  Chester, 
Penna. ; Reverend  Principal  E.  M.  Hill,  D.D.,  of  the  Con- 
gregational Theological  Seminary  at  Montreal,  and  Rev- 
erend Professor  Harry  F.  Rowe,  of  Nanking,  China. 

Chairman  Mackenzie,  in  accordance  with  his  earlier  an- 
nouncement, then  appointed  a Committee  on  Findings,  au- 
thorized to  formulate  the  results  of  the  discussions  of  the 
day  and  to  present  them  for  further  discussion  by  the  Con- 
ference on  the  following  day.  The  Committee  was  as 
follows : 

Professor  Ernest  D.  Burton,  Chairman, 

Secretary  James  L.  Barton, 

Professor  H.  P.  Beach, 

Secretary  W.  I.  Chamberlain, 

Secretary  George  Drach. 

Secretary  James  Endicott, 

Professor  R.  E.  Hume, 

Dean  M.  W.  Jacobus, 

President  H.  C.  King, 

President  W.  D.  Mackenzie, 

Dr.  John  R.  Mott, 

Principal  T.  R.  O’Meara, 

Dean  Wilfred  L.  Robbins, 

Principal  Elson  I.  Rexford, 

Dr.  Frank  K.  Sanders, 

Professor  E,  D.  Soper, 

Mr.  Fennell  P.  Turner. 


4 


After  prayer  the  session  adjourned  at  five  o’clock  until 
the  next  morning. 

On  Wednesday,  December  2nd,  at  ten  o’clock  the  Con- 
ference reconvened.  After  a quiet  service  of  intercession, 
conducted  by  the  Reverend  Arthur  J.  Brown,  D.D.,  Corre- 
sponding Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States,  and  participated 
in  by  many,  the  Committee  on  Findings  reported  through  its 
chairman.  Professor  Burton.  These  findings  were  dis- 
cussed in  detail  by  the  whole  Conference,  modified  in  many 
particulars  and  finally  committed,  with  general  approval,  for 
final  phrasing  to  an  editorial  committee  consisting  of  Dr. 
Endicott,  Professor  Hume  and  the  Director  of  the  Board 
of  Missionary  Preparation. 

The  chairman  in  closing  the  Conference  expressed  the 
grateful  thanks  of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation  to 
the  representatives  of  the  Theological  Seminaries  and  Mis- 
sion Boards  and  others,  who  had  come  at  such  personal 
inconvenience  to  assist  the  Board  to  discover  its  task  and 
the  wisest  ways  of  performing  it.  He  expressed  the  hope 
that  the  conclusions  of  the  Conference  would  appeal  strongly 
to  the  institutions  to  which  North  America  must  look  for 
thoroughly  educated  missionaries  and  induce  them  to  make 
a definite  attempt  to  solve  the  problems  of  organization  and 
instruction  involved  in  the  adequate  preparation  of  mission- 
ary candidates  for  their  life  task.  He  assured  them  that 
their  sympathy  and  support  would  give  a fresh  impetus  and 
a new  importance  to  the  work  of  the.  Board  of  Missionary 
Preparation,  and  invoked  upon  all  the  continuing  blessing  of 
God. 

The  session  closed  with  a prayer  and  benediction  by  Dr. 
Mackenzie. 


5 


THE  OPENING  ADDRESS 
Chairman  W.  Douglas  Mackenzie,  D.D. 

On  behalf  of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation  of  North  Amer- 
ica, I bid  a very  cordial  welcome  to  this  Conference,  which  it  has  called 
together. 

It  may  be  unnecessary  to  say  anything  about  the  origin  and  pur- 
pose of  our  Board,  beyond  reminding  you  that  it  grew  out  of  the  work 
done  at  the  World  Missionary  Conference  in  Edinburgh,  1910.  One 
of  the  most  important  of  the  subjects  treated  there  was  the  “Prepara- 
tion of  Missionaries.”  The  report  of  the  Commission  appointed  to 
study  it  was  issued  in  a volume  which  I trust  that  every  theological 
teacher  will  read.  The  Edinburgh  Conference  put  its  seal  in  a general 
way  upon  the  conclusions  of  that  Commission.  The  substance  of  these 
conclusions  was,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  time  had  come  for  a very 
much  deeper  study  of  this  question  of  missionary  preparation,  and  for 
the  putting  of  much  more  strength  into  it  on  the  part  of  all  missionary 
Boards  and  all  Churches.  The  need  of  this  was  demonstrated  beyond 
a doubt  or  cavil.  It  was  put  very  bluntly,  very  definitely,  not  as  the 
result  of  the  academic  judgment  of  a few  educators,  but  on  evidence 
obtained  from  scores  of  missionaries  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  That 
evidence  was  complete  and  convincing  to  the  effect  that  the  time  had 
come  for  taking  a new  step,  or  many  new  steps,  in  the  method  of  pre- 
paring young  men  and  women  for  the  foreign  missionary  field.  A 
Board  of  Studies  for  the  promotion  of  missionary  preparation  was  im- 
mediately organized  in  Great  Britain,  and,  in  the  following  year,  our 
Board  was  established  by  the  Annual  Conference  of  Foreign  Mission- 
ary Boards  in  North  America.  The  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation 
is,  therefore,  the  creature  of  that  Conference  and  breathes  its  spirit 
and  purpose.  We  have  behind  us  the  entire  weight  of  the  judgment 
which  is  annually  expressed  upon  our  work  by  that  assemblage  of  all 
the  Missionary  Boards  of  North  America  to  which  we  report. 

Our  Board  has  spent  the  first  three  years  of  its  existence  in  a very 
careful  study  of  its  whole  field.  Its  reports  have  received  hearty  ap- 
proval, and  are  available  in  printed  form  for  any  who  desire  to  consult 
them.  Two  or  three  of  its  committees  have  made  investigations  of  great 
interest  to  theological  educators.  One  with  Dr.  Speer  as  chairman  in- 
vestigated the  preparation  of  ordained  missionaries ; another,  under  the 
leadership  of  Dr.  Barton,  studied  the  existing  facilities  afforded  by 
theological  colleges  and  seminaries  and  by  schools  for  missionary  train- 
ing. The  results  gained  by  them  only  convinced  the  Board  that  there 
was  a field  for  further  investigation.  The  survey  of  the  entire  situation 
showed  that  there  was  widespread  confusion  of  theory  and  of  practice. 
So  many  varied  conceptions  seemed  to  obtain  as  to  what  special  mis- 
sionary preparation  is,  and  as  to  how  and  when  and  by  whom  it  should 
be  given,  that  we  felt  it  necessary  to  do  what  we  could  to  try  and  clear 
the  atmosphere.  We  decided,  therefore,  to  call  this  Conference  of  the 
Board  of  Missionary  Preparation  with  representatives  of  theological 
colleges  and  seminaries  and  secretaries  of  Foreign  Mission  Boards.  Its 
purpose  is  that,  with  your  help,  we  may  discover  what  the  situation  is 

6 


at  the  present  time;  and  that,  with  our  help,  you,  who  are  delegates 
from  the  theological  seminaries,  may  discover  what  your  practical 
problems  and  powers  are  in  the  matter  of  special  missionary  prepara- 
tion. A large  number  of  seminaries  are  represented  here  to-day.  Surely 
our  common  consideration  of  these  matters  will  throw  upon  them  a 
considerable  amount  of  light. 

It  is  an  interesting  fact  that  all  our  Theological  Schools  are  being 
compelled  to-day  to  conceive  of  their  own  peculiar  work  in  the  pres- 
ence, as  it  were,  of  the  whole  world.  I am  not  sure  that  they  have 
always  escaped  the  temptation  of  academic  institutions  to  live  in  tradi- 
tional and  narrow  circles  of  interest  and  to  conceive  of  their  work  too 
abstractly,  too  much  apart  from  the  supreme  and  living  task  of  the 
Church.  The  Churches  in  their  general  assemblies  and  conventions,  in 
their  great  central  boards,  even  the  individual  churches,  whenever  loyal 
to  their  denominational  institutions,  have  been  kept  confronting  the 
world,  and  have  always  felt  that  the  whole  task  of  the  world’s  conver- 
sion rested  upon  them.  If  this  practical  world  task  has  not  imposed 
itself  upon  the  policy,  spirit  and  work  of  the  Seminaries,  as  it  should 
have  done,  perhaps  they  will  hear  the  challenge  of  the  Church  through 
such  a Conference  as  this. 

The  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation  is  speaking  to  all  the  Semi- 
naries of  all  the  Churches  to  the  effect  that  we,  as  theological  institu- 
tions may  realize  more  fundamentally,  more  humbly,  more  convincingly 
as  to  the  intellect,  more  passionately  as  to  the  heart,  that  we  are  also 
living  sharers  in  the  resp>onsibility  of  carrying  the  gospel  to  the  whole 
world.  If  that  be  one  of  the  effects  of  this  Conference,  I think  it  will 
be  its  greatest  and  most  potent  influence.  For  if  that  tremendous  con- 
viction once  takes  hold  of  us,  then  all  the  rest  will  come,  and  our 
“Findings”  concerning  the  nature  and  scope  of  our  work  will  be  reached 
with  ease. 

You  will  see  that  the  Board  has  with  great  care  marked  out  for 
the  Conference  the  direction  which  the  discussions  shall  take.  First, 
we  shall  have  from  Dr.  Speer  a presentation  of  the  consensus  of  opinion 
which  has  already  been  reached  with  regard  to  the  preparation  needed 
by  ordained  missionaries.  Then,  we  take  up  the  question  whether  there 
are  particular  courses  in  the  theological  curriculiun  which  con- 
tribute to  this  work  of  missionary  preparation.  Later  will  be  raised  the 
question  whether  additional  courses  will  be  required.  Then  important 
practical  questions  will  present  themselves.  The  first  of  these  is 
whether  it  is  reasonable  to  expect  that  every  theological  seminary 
should  make  provision  for  these  new  subjects.  Further,  if  we  under- 
stand that  it  is  the  function  of  at  least  some  theological  seminaries  to 
undertake  them,  the  question  will  arise  whether  this  should  cause  a 
diminution  of  attention  to  any  of  the  traditional  elements  of  a theologi- 
cal course ; or,  if  it  appear  that  there  are  no  parts  of  that  curriculum 
which  we  can  venture  to  sacrifice  in  the  case  of  the  missionary  without 
serious  loss  to  his  all-round  efficiency,  whether  the  work  of  special 
missionary  preparation  should  be  provided  for  by  the  addition  of  a 
fourth  year. 

This,  in  brief,  is  the  outline  of  the  discussion  before  us.  The 

7 


methods  of  the  G>nference  I may  briefly  suggest.  The  work  of  many 
of  the  Commissions  and  Conferences  on  missionary  subjects  which  have 
met  since  the  Edinburgh  Conference  has  been  summed  up  by  means 
of  what  are  technically  called  “Findings.”  The  Edinburgh  Conference 
did  not  feel  that  it  would  be  safe  to  speak  of  “resolutions.”  That  would 
have  seemed  to  be  going  too  far  for  some  people.  Still  less  did  it  feel 
inclined  to  formulate  “recommendations.”  To  whom  were  they  to  be 
addressed,  and  what  right  had  the  Edinburgh  Conference  to  make 
recommendations  to  any  one?  The  committee  in  charge  adopted  the 
innocent  word  “Findings”  as  a happy  solution,  which  we  will  adopt. 
We  are  not  going  to  formulate  any  resolution  or  recommendation  that 
will  be  binding  upon  any  one  here  or  upon  any  institution  represented. 
It  is  merely  proposed  to  so  order  the  material  as  to  express  it  in  a 
“Finding.” 

These  Findings,  if  approved,  will  be  included  in  the  report  of  the 
Conference,  and  will,  I hope,  “find”  their  way  to  the  various  institu- 
tions that  are  represented  here.  For  this  purpose,  we  recommend  that 
a committee  be  appointed  to  sum  up  the  results  of  our  discussions.  At 
the  close  of  the  afternoon  meeting,  they  will  get  together  and  spend  the 
evening  and  night,  and  their  “findings”  will  become  the  basis  of  a 
general  discussion  on  the  floor  here  to-morrow  morning. 

We  have  with  us  to-day  a few  representatives  of  institutions  for 
missionary  training  not  classified  as  theological  schools,  and  a few 
missionaries  from  the  field.  We  welcome  them  all  to  a share  in  our 
deliberations. 


8 


PRESENT  CONSENSUS  OF  OPINION  REGARDING  THE 
PREPARATION  NECESSARY  FOR  ORDAINED 
MISSIONARIES 

Dr.  Robert  E.  Speer 


An  inquiry  into  the  present  consensus  of  opinion  regarding  the 
preparation  necessary  for  ordained  missionaries  was  conducted  by  a 
special  committee  of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation  which  re- 
ported to  the  Board  at  its  meeting  last  January.  The  committee  was 
composed  of  nine  representatives  of  theological  and  training  schools, 
all  of  them  active  teachers,  three  representatives  of  missionary  Boards, 
and  Dean  Russell  of  Teachers  College  at  Columbia  University.  This 
committee  had  before  it  a large  range  of  information  and  opinion, 
including  (1)  the  body  of  the  committee’s  own  individual  observations 
and  judgments;  (2)  the  mass  of  material  accumulated  by  the  mission- 
ary Boards  in  their  long  experience  with  this  problem,  and  recorded 
in  the  reports  of  their  annual  conferences;  (3)  the  studies  of  the  sub- 
ject made  by  theological  seminaries,  and,  in  some  of  them,  already 
embodied  in  revised  curricula ; (4)  the  report  of  Commission  V of  the 
Edinburgh  Conference,  which  dealt  with  the  preparation  of  mission- 
aries; (5)  the  findings  of  various  missionary  conferences,  and  especially 
of  the  Continuation  Committee  Conferences  held  in  Asia  in  1912-13; 
(6)  a series  of  communications  from  missionary  leaders  in  various 
fields  answering  a few  fundamental  questions  which  the  Committee 
had  sent  them  and  making  fresh  suggestions  in  the  light  of  all  the  wide 
discussions  of  the  subject  in  recent  years.  The  purpose  of  this  open- 
ing statement  this  morning  is  to  give  an  abstract  of  all  this  mass  of 
material.  Every  one  will  realize  that  this  is  no  easy  task. 

Let  us  first  consider  some  fundamental  principles.  One  of  the 
most  indomitable  and  successful  educational  missionaries  of  the  last 
century,  whose  influence  is  still  deeply  felt  in  China,  used  to  lay  down 
three  educational  axioms  which  should  govern  all  missionary  educa- 
tional work  in  the  foreign  field.  First,  such  education  must  be  thor- 
ough. If  it  was  not  thorough,  that  is,  accurate  and  true,  it  was  not 
real  education  and  it  was  not  Christian.  If  Christianity  requires  any 
one  thing  which  can  never  be  compromised  or  qualified,  it  is  truth  both 
in  material  and  in  method.  He  insisted  that  whatever  work  was  done, 
whether  little  or  much,  it  must  be  thorough,  and  that  if  the  choice  must 
be  made  between  much  carelessly  done  and  a little  thoroughly  done,  the 
little  must  be  chosen.  Second,  it  must  be  adapted.  It  must  be  given 
in  the  language  in  which  the  student  thought  and  in  which  he  could 
communicate  the  results  of  his  education  to  others.  Its  purpose  was  to 
fit  men  for  the  work  which  they  were  to  do  and  for  the  environment 
in  which  they  were  to  live.  Third,  it  must  be  Christian.  At  the  first 
he  had  no  Christian  students  to  work  upon,  so  he  took  a few  heathen 
boys  into  his  own  home  and  so  taught  and  influenced  them  that  they 
became  Christians.  When  he  had  thus  a Christian  student  atmosphere 
to  work  with,  be  brought  in  more  boys  from  non-Christian  homes,  but 

9 


made  it  a rule  never  to  have  more  non-Christians  than  the  Christian 
spirit  of  the  school  could  control  and  absorb.  The  education  which  he 
provided  was  the  best  scientific  education  obtainable  in  China;  but 
whatever  the  subject  of  study,  the  aim  and  the  spirit,  the  tone  and  the 
result  had  to  be  unqualifiedly  Christian. 

Now  if  these  principles  are  valid,  as  they  surely  are,  in  missionary 
education,  they  are  valid  in  the  education  of  missionaries. 

1.  The  training  given  to  ordained  missionaries  must  he  thorough. 
This  is  an  ethical  as  well  as  a pedagogical  necessity.  It  must  be  ade- 
quate in  quantity  and  duration,  in  order  to  allow  time  for  thorough 
work.  Our  correspondents  agree  in  requiring  a high  school  and  college 
course  with  the  B.A.  degree  to  be  followed  by  a course  in  the  theo- 
logical seminary.  It  is  obvious  that  exceptional  men  will  appear  some- 
time without  this  full  training  but,  nevertheless,  with  adequate  prepara- 
tion. This,  however,  is  the  normal  requirement  and  the  training  given 
must  be  thorough  in  its  quality,  because  only  so  is  it  true.  And  how 
can  teachers  of  truth  be  prepared  except  by  true  teaching?  And  how 
otherwise  can  they  be  made  men  who  will  not  flinch  from  hard  intel- 
lectual problems  on  the  mission  field,  or  attempt  to  advance  the  truth 
by  false  or  incompetent  devices  ? Men  who  are  to  be  missionaries  must 
be  made  workmen  of  absolute  veracity  of  method  and  action,  of  habit 
and  view  and  feeling. 

2.  The  training  given  to  ordained  missionaries  must  be  adapted 
to  prepare  them  for  their  work,  (a)  It  should  be  determined  by  the 
actual  requirements  of  the  work  on  the  foreign  field.  A good  deal  that 
is  offered  in  the  theological  course  is  not  so  adapted.  The  subject  itself 
may  be  necessary,  but  the  form  in  which  it  is  given  and  the  exp>ository 
or  apologetic  cast  given  to  it  is  unadapted.  Oftentimes  a reshaping  of 
such  courses  with  a view  to  adapting  them  to  foreign  missionary  prep- 
aration, would  at  the  same  time  make  them  even  more  effective  as 
preparation  for  the  home  ministry,  (b)  The  training  offered  should 
be  directed  to  giving  men  the  power  of  adaptation  to  the  unknown, 
rather  than  ready-made  fitness  to  the  known.  It  is  never  possible  to 
give  a man  a full  understanding  of  the  conditions  which  he  is  to  face 
on  the  foreign  field.  No  cut  and  dried  preparation  will  ever  prep>are 
him.  He  must  be  given  the  secret  of  self-adaptation  to  unforeseen 
intellectual  contingencies,  (c)  The  training  needed  must  qualify  men 
to  deal  with  fundamental  and  elemental  problems.  On  the  mission 
field,  mixed  with  twentieth  century  problems,  the  missionary  meets  also 
the  problems  of  the  first  and  the  fourth  and  the  eighteenth  and  all  the 
other  Christian  centuries.  The  ecclesiastical  and  doctrinal  issues  of 
our  churches  at  home  to-day  are  only  part  of  what  missionaries  meet. 
They  must  be  able  to  distinguish  principles  from  all  that  obscures  them 
and  to  deal  with  them  fundamentally,  (d)  To  this  end  they  need 
courage  and  freedom  as  well  as  discernment.  They  are  to  be  founders 
of  new  national  churches  and  leaders  in  new  organizations  of  life. 
They  should  be  men  of  creative  leadership  who  can  detect  and  warm 
into  reality  the  germs  of  power  and  service  in  others.  Of  course, 
seminaries  are  limited  in  this  result  by  the  character  of  the  material 

10 


they  have  to  work  upon ; but  just  as  far  as  possible  they  should  release 
the  creative  energies  in  the  material  they  have  and  prepare  it  for  posi- 
tive achievement,  (e)  An  adequately  adapted  training  would  also  seek 
to  turn  out  men  for  a world  enterprise,  calling  for  the  widest  sym- 
pathies and  understandings,  men  whose  intellectual  apprehensions  had 
been  universalized;  who,  to  a simple,  clean  and  conclusive  faith  and 
experience  in  Christ,  add  a fulness  of  concord  with  His  world  purposes 
and  who  follow  Him  in  the  fulness  of  His  plans  for  all  humanity. 

3.  The  training  of  ordained  missionaries  must  also  be  Christian. 
This  means  that  it  must  be  evangelical  and  evangelistic.  The  ordained 
missionary  should  go  out  driven  by  the  propulsion  of  a deep  evangel- 
ism. It  will  not  be  enough  to  make  him  a sedentary  apologist  or  a 
stagnant  schoolmaster.  He  must  be  a maker  of  tireless  evangelists, 
and  to  that  end  the  Gospel  must  be  a fire  in  his  own  soul,  keeping  him 
ever  restless  and  making  everyone  about  him  restive  until  they  become 
propagandists  also.  There  is  a striking  letter  in  our  report  on  this 
subject  to  the  last  meeting  of  this  Board  from  the  Rev.  Geo.  D.  Wilder, 
of  North  China,  in  which  Mr.  Wilder  laments  the  deterioration  both  in 
voliune  and  in  power  of  evangelistic  preaching  in  North  China.  The 
ablest  missionaries  having  withdrawn  from  chapel  preaching  to  imder- 
take  educational  and  other  institutional  forms  of  work,  the  ablest 
natives  were  following  their  example,  so  that  the  preaching  was  not 
as  effective  as  it  had  been  in  earlier  days.  The  example  of  the  mis- 
sionaries was  and  always  will  be  more  powerful  than  their  precept. 
Unless  the  strongest  missionaries  are  full  of  the  evangelistic  spirit  and 
busy  in  evangelistic  work,  the  strongest  natives  will  not  be.  Ordained 
missionaries,  accordingly,  whatever  the  form  of  work  which  they  are 
to  take  up,  ought  to  be  so  trained  in  the  home  seminaries  in  the  warmth 
and  life  of  the  Gospel  that  their  one  consuming  purpose  shall  be  to  push 
the  Gospel  into  all  hiunan  life  and  to  the  rim  of  the  world. 

Assmning,  then,  that  the  training  of  ordained  missionaries  is  to 
be  thorough,  adapted  and  Christian,  we  may  go  on  to  ask  what  the 
consensus  of  opinion  indicates  as  the  most  important  subjects  of  study, 
and  we  need  not  attempt  to  arrange  them  in  any  order  of  importance. 

1.  Theology. — All  agree  that  theology  must  be  one  of  the  main 
subjects.  The  emphasis,  however,  is  not  upon  such  a descriptive  word 
as  dogmatic  or  systematic,  although  there  is  full  recognition  of  the  im- 
portance of  that  which  these  words  connote;  it  is  rather  such  adjectives 
as  Biblical  or  historical  or  comparative.  And  the  issue  which  such 
comparative  study  should  deal  with  is  not  so  much  what  Calvinism  has 
to  say  against  Arminianism,  for  example,  but  what  Calvinism  has  to  say 
against  its  own  exaggeration  in  the  Hindu  doctrine  of  Karma,  or  the 
mechanical  fatalism  of  some  schools  of  Islam;  not  what  Arminianism 
has  to  say  against  Calvinism,  but  what  it  has  to  say  to  its  own  distortion 
in  the  antinomianism  of  Hindu  pantheism,  or  to  theories  of  divine 
propitiation  which  make  free  grace  look  pallid.  Theology,  in  other 
words,  needs  to  be  taught  against  a background  of  real  knowledge  of 
what  the  theological  problems  are  on  the  mission  field,  and  what  the 

11 


task  is  of  interpreting  Christian  truth  to  the  human  minds  which  are 
actually  to  be  dealt  with. 

2.  Comparative  Religion. — Our  correspondents  lay  emphasis  upon 
the  necessity  of  teaching  Comparative  Religion,  and  of  teaching  it 
truly,  and  with  as  great  an  approach  as  possible  to  reality.  It  is  easy 
to  set  up  the  non-Christian  religions  in  a class-room  and  demolish  them. 
Their  weaknesses  are  absolutely  fatal  to  them  in  our  thought  about 
them,  but  those  who  hold  these  religions  have  reasons  for  doing  so, 
which  they  are  prepared  to  state  and  argue.  Bishop  Lefroy,  of  Lahore, 
used  to  come  home  wearied  to  death  at  the  end  of  the  day  after  his 
discussions  with  Mohammedans  on  the  issue  between  Christianity  and 
Islam.  His  opponents  were  not  ready  to  fall  down  and  surrender 
before  the  case  which  it  is  easy  enough  to  construct  in  a class-room  ten 
thousand  miles  away.  Of  course,  no  one  can  be  brought  face  to  face 
with  the  reality  of  these  religions,  until  he  actually  meets  them  on  their 
own  soil;  but,  as  far  as  possible.  Comparative  Religion  should  be 
studied  in  the  atmosphere  of  reality  and  justice  should  be  done  to  the 
actual  problems  which  are  to  be  faced. 

3.  Apologetics. — The  study  of  the  actual  apologetic  problems 
which  men  encounter  when  they  attempt  to  propagate  Christianity, 
which  differ  in  different  countries.  Southern  Buddhism  and  Islam, 
Confucianism  and  Vedantism  are  very  different  things.  In  some  lands 
our  western  infidelities  have  made  their  way.  How  can  men  as  they 
are  when  we  meet  them  be  convinced  of  the  truth  of  God  in  Christ 
and  brought  to  faith  and  new  life  in  Him?  How  is  this  greatest  of  all 
problems  to  be  studied  and  solved  ? 

4.  Church  History. — Every  one  emphasizes  the  importance  of 
Church  History  both  as  the  history  of  the  development  of  doctrine  and 
as  the  story  of  evangelization.  As  one  of  our  correspondents  puts  it: 

A prospective  missionary  should  take  all  he  can  obtain  in  the  Histoiy  of 
Religions,  and  their  comparison,  where  the  distinctive  features  of  Christianity 
are  well  emphasized,  and  most  especially  every  form  of  study  emphasizing  God 
in  history.  The  Bible  is  history,  but  it  is  peculiarly  God  in  history  for  the  re- 
demption of  man.  There  are  some  noble  books  along  this  line — Bunsen — but  we 
need  more,  and  I believe  that  the  missionary  history  of  the  past  century  ought 
to  be  ready  to  supply  them.  While  I am  not  exactly  conversant  with  the  details 
of  many  seminary  courses,  I have  an  impression  that  there  are  many  minor 
courses  which  might  give  way  to  these  major  courses  of  God  in  history. 

Missions  are  making  church  history  now,  just  as  it  was  made  in 
Asia  Minor,  or  in  Germany,  or  in  Scotland  in  the  past,  and  a study 
of  past  church  history  as  the  record  of  actual  evangelization  is  the  most 
immediately  fruitful  study  an  ordained  missionary  can  undertake.  It 
is  also  one  of  the  most  dangerous.  Nowhere  else  is  it  easier  to  err  as 
to  the  lessons  taught,  or  to  confuse  the  essential  and  universal  with 
the  transitory  and  local. 

5.  Christian  Transformation  of  Society. — A fifth  subject  is 
closely  related  to  the  two  just  mentioned  and  may,  indeed,  be  melted 
into  them.  It  might  be  called  church  politics.  It  is  something  more 

12 


than  ecclesiastical  polity.  It  is  the  science  of  missions,  the  method  of 
propagandism — how  to  found  Christian  institutions  and  to  introduce 
Christian  principles  into  life.  Sociology  is  another  subject  which 
belongs  in  the  same  group.  Whatever  the  title,  the  field  to  be  covered 
includes  the  problem  of  the  relation  of  Christian  ethics  to  life,  the 
transformation  of  society  into  conformity  to  Christian  ideals,  the  rela- 
tion of  Church  and  state,  and  similar  themes. 

6.  The  Science  and  Art  of  Education. — The  word  pedagogy  used 
to  express  what  is  meant  by  this  title,  but  the  educationalists  in  self- 
defense  seem  to  have  discarded  it.  The  missionary  is  a preacher  of 
the  Gospel.  All  missionary  preaching  must  of  necessity  be  teaching. 
How  to  teach,  how  to  teach  others  to  teach,  the  secret  of  communicating 
truth,  of  developing  character,  of  making  truth  contagious  so  that  it 
will  spread  of  itself — these  are  fundamental  necessities  of  the  ordained 
missionary.  He  needs  such  a training  as  our  Lord  gave  the  Twelve. 

7.  The  Bible. — The  Bible,  whether  in  the  original  languages,  or  in 
English,  or  in  all,  is  to  be  mastered  by  the  ordained  missionary  as  a part 
of  his  training  for  his  work.  Here,  too,  our  correspondents  urge  some- 
thing more  than  mere  perfunctory  teaching.  They  urge  that  men 
should  be  put  in  possession  of  methods  of  study  which  will  endure  the 
strains  which  are  to  come,  that  they  get  solid  ground  under  their  feet 
regarding  the  things  that  are  central,  so  that  when  they  go  out  and 
have  to  stand  alone,  they  can  stand  alone.  So  one  correspondent  writes : 

A study  of  theology,  largely  historical,  is  important  in  order  to  enable  the 
missionary  to  understand  the  large  variety  of  beliefs  he  will  meet.  I think  per- 
sonally that  thorough  Bible  study  is  better  than  formal  theology  to  lead  to  the 
definite  personal  convictions  that  are  very  important.  Church  history  with  spe- 
cial attention  to  the  causes  and  means  of  the  expansion  of  Christianity  and  also 
the  working  out  of  Christian  principles  in  society  is  important. 

The  Bible  should  be  taught  as  a living  missionary  book,  as  Arnold 
taught  Roman  history,  and  as  he  taught  the  Bible,  too. 

8.  Christian  Dynamics. — Men  should  study  the  dynamics  of 
Christianity.  What  are  the  secrets  of  power?  What  makes  some  kinds 
of  Christianity  and  some  Christian  men  effective  and  fruitful,  and 
others  not?  What  truth  has  the  vital  energy  in  it?  What  habits  of 
personal  life  condition  power?  The  Gospel  is  to  go  to  the  world,  not 
in  word  only,  but  in  power.  The  latter  as  well  as  the  former  should  be 
the  subject  of  study  and  of  solicitude. 

These  are  the  main  outstanding  subjects  on  which  our  corre- 
spondents lay  emphasis.  And  now  if  you  will  turn  to  the  report  of  our 
Committee,  in  the  Third  Annual  Report  of  the  Board  of  Missionary 
Preparation,  pp.  36  and  37,  you  will  find  a pretty  complete  list  of  the 
subjects  suggested  in  the  consensus  of  opinion  which  we  have  gathered. 


13 


These  subjects  may  be  divided  into  groups  as  follows : 


1.  Systematic  theology. 
Church  history. 
Apologetics. 


2.  Comparative  religion. 
The  science  of  missions. 
Missionary  biography. 
The  Bible. 


3.  History  of  philosophy. 
History  of  civilization. 
History  of  religion. 


4.  Principles  of  religious  education. 
Pedagogy. 


Biblical  pedagogy. 
Psychology. 


5.  Modern  languages,  especially 


6.  Missions  and  world  movements. 
Early  conflict  of  Christianity  with 
heathenism. 


German. 

Hebrew. 

Greek. 

Phonetics. 


Political,  economic  and  diplomatic 


history  of  foreign  mission 


fields. 


7.  Political  and  economic  geography. 
Sociology  and  civics. 

Ethnology  and  anthropology. 
Astronomy. 

Economics. 

Biology. 


8.  Music. 

Art. 

Business  methods. 


9.  Sanitary  science. 
Hygiene. 

First  aid  to  the  injured. 


This  list,  full  as  it  is,  doubtless  omits  some  things  which  some 
will  deem  desirable,  but  it  is  full  enough,  and  the  man  with  this  prep- 
aration will  be  well  prepared.  At  the  same  time,  it  needs  to  be  recog- 
nized that  if  a man  does  not  prepare  himself  no  one  else  can  prepare 
him,  and  that  much  of  the  method  of  his  self-preparation  is  of  neces- 
sity an  individual  and  incommunicable  process. 

As  to  where  all  this  training  is  to  be  secured,  it  is  not  our  province 
to  discuss,  but  we  may  say  that  our  correspondents  are  not  arguing  for 
a supplementary  training  for  ordained  missionaries,  or  for  a set  of 
special  studies  to  be  externally  tacked  on  to  their  other  training,  which 
may  have  been  the  conventional  training  for  men  in  the  home  ministry 
as  heretofore  conceived.  What  is  needed  rather  is  the  organic  cor- 
relation of  a proper  course  of  training  to  the  needs  of  missionary  candi- 
dates throughout  their  course ; and  there  would  seem  to  be  ground  for 
holding  that  the  training  even  of  home  ministers  would  be  improved 
by  its  approximation  to  such  a vital  reshaping  of  work,  as  appears  to 
be  desirable  for  missionaries. 

In  conclusion,  one  of  our  friends  in  China  has  invented  a word 
which  he  thinks  describes  an  element  which  should  be  included  in  the 
training  of  missionaries.  He  writes : 

If  you  could  invent  a new  course  in  “Spartanics”  or  something  like  that — I 
mean  the  science  of  “non-quitting” — you  would  very  greatly  benefit  the  mission- 
ary cause.  Our  missionaries  are  dropping  off  far  too  fast  these  days,  not  as 
shocks  of  corn  fully  ripe,  but  in  the  full  green  of  the  spring  tide,  and  they  drop 
off  and  are  both  lost  and  gone  before  (their  proper  time). 

Is  there  not  a real  truth  here?  Our  friend  is  not  alone  in  wanting 
more  iron  and  steel  in  the  training  of  missionaries.  But  how  is  it  to  be 
put  in?  If  it  was  not  bred  in  by  grandfathers  and  grandmothers,  if 
men  come  to  the  seminaries  putty  instead  of  rock,  how  are  they  to  be 
made  Spartans  in  their  sense  of  duty  and  loyalty?  And  we  may  add 
two  more  elements  to  this  one.  To  keep  up  the  White-Star-Line-bar- 


14 


barism  of  our  friend,  one  might  be  called  Humanics  and  the  other 
Vitalics.  The  former  term  will  suffice  to  suggest  the  need  of  sym- 
pathy, of  human  understanding  and  adaptability,^  the  capacity  to  get 
along  with  people,  to  make  light  of  all  hindrances  in  the  way  of  human 
service,  to  see  the  joy  and  keep  the  sunlight  on  the  face  and  in  the 
heart.  The  other  word  covers  the  need  of  the  central  power  which 
makes  the  impact,  which  drives  home,  which  reaches  past  the  seedtime 
to  the  harvest.  It  calls  for  the  central  union  of  the  man  with  God 
and  for  the  faith  which  claims  the  mighty  promises — “The  works  that 
I do  shall  ye  do  also  and  greater  works  than  these  shall  ye  do  because 
I go  unto  my  Father.”  It  is  easy  to  take  these  things  for  granted,  but 
they  ought  not  to  be  taken  for  granted.  They  must  be  recognized  and 
thought  of  and  planned  for.  We  ought  consciously  to  put  first  in  the 
training  of  missionaries  the  things  which  are  actually  of  first  impor- 
tance. These  must  under  no  tacit  assumption  be  ignored  in  preparing 
men  who  are  to  go  out  to  do  the  most  difficult,  perplexing,  creative 
work  in  the  world ; a work,  however,  to  which  humble  and  self-distrust- 
ful men  can  safely  go  at  their  Master’s  call  and  to  which  the  proud  and 
self-assumed,  whatever  their  training,  have  no  summons  until  they 
first  forget  themselves  in  Christ. 


WHAT  COURSES  OFFERED  IN  THE  STANDARD  CURRICU- 
LUM OF  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARIES  AND  COLLEGES 
CONTRIBUTE  DIRECTLY  TO  THE  PREPARATION  OF 
THE  ORDAINED  MISSIONARY? 

Reverend  Professor  O.  E.  Brown,  D.D, 

One  cannot  approach  the  discussion  of  this  question  without 
acknowledging  first  of  all  a large  indebtedness  to  the  Board  of  Mis- 
sionary Preparation.  At  the  last  meeting  of  the  Board  at  Kansas  City, 
Dr.  Speer  gave  the  results  of  a thorough  study  of  the  problem  of  the 
preparation  of  ordained  missionaries.  At  that  same  meeting.  Dr. 
Barton  submitted  a very  valuable  report  on  the  facilities  for  the  train- 
ing of  missionaries,  wherein  a central  place  was  given  to  the  work  of 
the  theological  schools.  Dr.  Mott  has  also  made  an  indispensable  con- 
tribution to  our  inquiry  in  the  suggestions  for  the  training  of  mission- 
aries which  are  given  in  the  Report  on  the  Continuation  Committee 
Conferences  in  Asia,  1912-13.  These  sources  make  an  authoritative 
supplement  to  the  historic  report  of  Commission  V on  The  Preparation 
of  Missionaries,  at  the  World’s  Missionary  Conference  of  1910. 

Let  me  call  attention  to  three  definite  restrictions  implied  in  the 
theme  which  is  proposed  for  consideration  at  this  time.  Our  inquiry  is 
restricted  to  ordained  missionaries,  i.  e.,  to  those  who  are  specially 
charged  with  evangelistic  work,  pastoral  leadership,  and  the  direction 
of  organized  church  life.  It  is  further  restricted  to  the  actual  courses 
of  study  now  to  be  found  in  our  standard  theological  schools.  To  be 

15 


sure,  these  vary  so  greatly  in  their  courses  of  study  that  a standard 
curriculum  may  be  impossible  of  identification.  We  may,  however, 
arrive  at  a general  average  for  our  theological  schools  and  may,  not 
unreasonably,  assume  certain  standard  courses  by  which  it  is  sought 
to  prepare  men  for  the  service  of  the  Christian  Church  at  home  and 
abroad.  A third  restriction  of  the  inquiry  is  to  the  direct  usefulness  of 
the  preparation  given  in  missionary  service.  Every  sort  of  preparation 
which  ministers  to  a richer  Christian  personality  makes  for  a better 
missionary,  but  some  lines  of  preparation  seem  peculiarly  adapted  to 
promote  the  missionary’s  evangelistic  and  constructive  leadership.  Our 
question  is,  therefore : How  does  the  average  seminary  course  prepare 
the  ordained  missionary  for  his  distinctive  task? 

Theological  schools  are  meant,  primarily,  to  prepare  men  for  effi- 
cient ministerial  leadership  in  the  home  land.  It  does  not  follow,  how- 
ever, that  courses  of  study  which  are  directly  valuable  for  the  ordained 
man  at  home  are  onlv  of  secondary  value  to  the  ordained  worker 
abroad.  The  Japan  National  Conference  in  April,  1913,  one  of  the 
series  of  Continuation  Committee  Conferences,  registered  the  convic- 
tion that  “for  work  in  Japan  as  thorougfh  an  equipment  is  needed  as  for 
parallel  work  in  Christian  lands.”  This  judgment  expresses  the  need 
for  the  same  values  in  training  for  work  at  home  or  abroad,  with 
special  emphasis  on  some  studies  called  for  by  Japan’s  peculiar  needs. 
The  China  Conference  also  adopted  a finding  to  the  effect  that  the 
missionary  preparation  should  include  “an  education  as  complete,  in  all 
respects,  as  that  needed  for  the  holy  ministry  ...  at  home.”  Further- 
more, the  India  National  Conference  specified  “a  thorough  training  in 
theology”  as  a requisite  in  missionary  preparation.  Dr.  Speer  reported 
at  Kansas  City,  a year  ago,  as  a result  of  his  investigations,  that  “all 
are  agreed,  also,  that  the  foreign  missionary  should  have  a theological 
training  as  thorough  as  that  of  the  ministry  at  home.”  Some  would 
have  the  same  required  courses  for  both  the  home  pastorate  and  the 
foreign  service,  leaving  variation  only  in  the  field  of  electives.  A 
statement,  therefore,  of  the  direct  value  of  our  theological  courses  for 
the  ordained  missionary  may  seem  to  be  largely  in  terms  applicable  to 
fitness  for  ministerial  leadership  in  general.  The  home  and  foreign 
workers  are  dealing  with  the  same  great  essentials ; they  are  only  seek- 
ing to  adjust  them  to  differing  environments. 

The  direct  preparation  of  the  ordained  missionary  may  be  con- 
sidered from  the  standpoint  of  the  several  functions  which  he  is  ex- 
pected to  fulfil.  These  functions  can  be  treated  here  only  in  larger 
outline. 

1.  Interpretation. — The  first  function  of  the  ordained  missionary 
which  calls  for  special  emphasis  is  his  work  of  interpretation.  His 
great  task  is  to  interpret  essential  Christianity  to  a non-Christian  peo- 
ple. He  is  in  life,  and  speech,  and  leadership  to  answer,  in  intelligible 
terms,  the  question.  What  is  Christianity?  or  the  more  specific  question. 
Who  is  Christ?  It  is  clear  that  no  courses  of  study  can  be  of  more 
direct  value  than  those  which  furnish  him  with  the  best  means  for 
answering  such  questions.  Of  first  importance  are  those  courses  which 
enable  the  student,  with  a spirit  of  scientific  genuineness,  to  interpret 

16 


the  original  documents  of  the  Christian  faith.  New  Testament  study, 
with  a command  of  New  Testament  Greek,  deserves  the  same  crowning 
place  in  missionary  preparation  which  it  holds  in  the  theological 
curriculum.  Greek  is  stressed,  becaused  it  alone  furnishes  an  approach 
to  scientific  certainty  in  interpretation.  A supreme  need  on  the  mission 
field  to-day  is  a scientific,  as  distinguished  from  a sectarian,  interpreta- 
tion of  the  New  Testament.  Unity  and  co-operation  on  these  fields 
wait  upon  a more  harmonious  insight  into  the  fundamental  meaning  of 
the  New  Testament  writings.  Assuming  the  normative  value  of  the 
New  Testament,  a sectarian  interpretation  of  its  teachings  causes 
division  rather  than  unification.  Our  theological  schools  can  make 
their  most  direct  contribution  to  the  missionary  enterprise  of  our  day 
by  furnishing  a body  of  missionaries  who  have  been  initiated  into  the 
great  catholic  brotherhood  of  scientific  interpreters  of  the  Bible.  The 
Old  and  New  Testaments  are  so  intimately  interwoven  as  to  make  each 
the  vital  clue  to  the  understanding  of  the  other.  Our  theological  in- 
stitutions, through  their  facilities  for  the  historical  interpretation  of 
the  Old  Testament,  furnish  another  definite  contribution  to  the  training 
of  the  ordained  missionary.  Missionary  experts  differ  as  to  the  essen- 
tial value  of  Hebrew  for  the  proper  mastery  of  the  Old  Testament,  but 
the  burden  of  proof  would  seem  to  rest  upon  those  who  question  the 
direct  serviceableness  of  the  study  of  the  Old  Testament  in  its  original 
language.  The  standard  curriculum  of  our  theological  schools  is 
giving  an  increasingly  vital  place  to  the  study  of  the  English  Bible. 
Without  question,  the  ordained  missionary  should  supplement  his 
study  of  the  Bible  in  the  original  languages  with  a comprehensive  mas- 
tery of  the  Bible  in  English.  This  study  should  be  interpretative  and 
historical  as  well  as  practical.  There  will  also  be  an  unquestionable 
contribution  to  missionary  efficiency  in  the  study  of  the  leading  ideas 
and  principles  of  the  Hebrew  and  Christian  religions  as  these  are  set 
forth  in  Biblical  Theology. 

The  interpretative  work  of  the  missionary  will  be  greatly  furthered 
by  the  study  of  Christianity  in  its  historic  growth,  as  it  has  adjusted 
to  its  changing  environments.  Church  History,  in  its  great  essentials, 
is  the  story  of  the  missionary  expansion  of  Christianity.  The  ceaseless 
challenge  of  Church  History  is  to  a distinction  between  the  changeless 
verities  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  the  adaptive  forms  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Fundamental  to  missionary  efficiency  is  the  discovery  of  those 
timeless  essentials  which  constitute  the  undergirding  unity  of  Christian 
history.  If  overvaluation  of  the  denominational  forms  of  Christianity 
is  a hindrance  to  all-round  missionary  service,  then  Church  History  is 
a wholesome  cure.  Moreover,  the  missionary  has  a search-light  turned 
upon  his  own  task,  when  he  follows  up  the  adjustment  of  the  Christian 
faith  to  widely  varying  cultural  environments  and  racial  minds.  Dr. 
Barton’s  investigations  have  shown  that  the  theological  schools  are 
quite  generally  providing  courses  in  History  and  Philosophy  of  Religion 
as  well  as  in  Comparative  Religion.  These  studies  are  valuable  because 
Christianity  can  only  be  fully  appreciated  where  it  is  known  in  com- 
parison with  other  historic  faiths.  The  missionary  needs  to  know  with 
thoroughness  the  specific  religious  environment  into  which  his  work 

17 


calls  him ; but  he  can  face  that  environment  with  peculiar  courage  and 
hopefulness  if  he  has  seen  how  Christianity  fulfills  all  that  is  best  in 
other  religions  and  redeems  all  that  is  base  in  them.  If  we  interpret 
Systematic  Theology  to  mean  the  presentation  of  Christianity  in  the 
light  of  present-day  thought  and  experience,  then  it,  too,  will  have  a 
vital  part  in  preparing  the  evangelistic  worker  for  his  divine  task  of 
creating  “one  new  man”  out  of  those  who  are  “far  off”  and  those  who 
are  “nigh.”  The  standard  theological  schools  can  thus  contribute  to 
the  preparation  of  the  ordained  missionary  for  his  interpretative  work 
through  their  courses  in  Old  and  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Bibli- 
cal Theology,  and  the  English  Bible ; their  courses  in  the  History, 
Philosophy,  and  Comparative  Science  of  Religion;  and  their  courses 
in  Church  History  and  Christian  Theology. 

2.  Organization. — ^Another  function  of  the  missionary  is  his  con- 
structive church  work.  The  ordained  missionary  must  not  only  be  able 
to  win  individuals  to  accept  his  interpretation  of  Christ  and  Christian- 
ity, but  he  must  be  able  to  organize  these  individual  believers  into  an 
effective  social  force.  The  seminary  course  in  Homiletics  will  prove 
of  value  in  so  far  as  it  teaches  effective  ways  of  presenting  the  Chris- 
tian message,  but  the  formal  and  technical  art  of  sermon-making  and 
delivery  will  need  to  be  used  with  great  caution,  lest  the  missionary 
becomes  the  victim  of  art  for  art’s  sake.  The  courses  in  Pastoral 
Theology,  with  emphasis  on  personal  work,  personal  ministration,  and 
practical  Christian  effort,  are  essential  to  the  ordained  missionary, 
though  the  methods  must  be  carefully  adapted  to  the  new  social  environ- 
ment into  which  they  are  carried.  Of  very  direct  value  will  be  the 
study  of  the  essentials  of  church  organization.  Each  missionary  should 
have  an  intelligent  mastery  of  the  form  of  organization  represented  by 
his  own  denomination.  This  theological  schools  are  providing.  In  a 
less  degree  they  are  providing  for  the  equally  important  comparative 
study  of  church  organization.  This  study,  with  its  judicial  yet  sym- 
pathetic consideration  of  prevailing  types  of  organization,  should  culti- 
vate the  conviction  that  in  the  organic  forms  of  Christianity  lies  the 
field  of  readiest  adjustment  to  the  demands  of  a new  environment.  It 
was  once  thought  that  the  seminary  courses  dealing  with  the  history 
and  conduct  of  religious  revivals  or  missions  were  without  applica- 
bility to  conditions  in  our  foreign  fields.  It  is  now  found  that  these 
courses  have  to  do  with  methods  of  work  most  widely  useful  in  mis- 
sionary service.  In  fact,  there  are  few  studies  in  the  field  of  practical 
theology  which  the  ordained  missionary  can  omit  without  lowering 
his  efficiency. 

3.  Social  Upbuilding. — The  next  task  of  the  ordained  missionary 
is  one  of  a corrective  or  reformatory  nature.  This  is  the  most  delicate 
feature  of  missionary  service.  A polemical,  iconoclastic  attitude  towards 
religious,  political,  and  social  institutions  may  mean  a forfeiture  of  all 
opportunity  for  working  toward  a better  day.  Our  Lord  was  at  once 
the  world’s  greatest  revolutionist  and  the  world’s  greatest  peacemaker. 
His  messengers  must  be  like  Him.  The  seminary  courses  in  Christian 
Sociology  and  in  Christian  Ethics  will  prove  of  great  value  to  the  social 
physician.  These  courses  usually  presuppose  college  courses  in  sociol- 

18 


ogy  and  ethical  science.  Some  seminaries  are  offering  courses  in 
crime  and  punishments,  in  pauperism  and  charities,  in  the  problems 
of  the  family  and  the  city.  These  courses  are  made  more  helpful  by 
the  fact  that  they  are  coming  to  be  taught  by  the  comparative  method 
and  by  the  use  of  sociological  and  other  data  furnished  by  the  great 
mission  fields.  Theological  schools  also  furnish  opportunities  for 
studying  the  outstanding  moral  and  social  reform  movements  of  Chris- 
tian history.  Many  schools,  in  the  History  of  Missions,  discuss  the 
policy  which  typical  missionary  leaders  have  followed  in  dealing  with 
the  social  and  civic  evils  of  the  non-Christian  world.  The  seminary 
library,  with  its  collection  of  missionary  biographies,  has  a very  rich 
contribution  to  make  to  this  line  of  missionary  preparation. 

4.  Education. — A fourth  task  of  the  ordained  missionary  is  edu- 
cative. He  is  set  fully  as  much  for  the  discovery,  the  enlistment  and  the 
practical  training  of  evangelistic  leaders,  as  he  is  for  winning  individual 
converts.  Indeed,  the  science  of  missions  is  pointing  toward  intensive 
work  in  the  training  of  potential  leaders  as  the  most  productive  func- 
tion of  the  ordained  missionary.  Too  much  emphasis,  therefore,  can- 
not be  put  upon  the  value,  for  the  missionary,  of  the  courses  in  Reli- 
gious Education  which  all  of  our  standard  theological  schools  are  offer- 
ing. Courses  in  the  History  and  Principles  of  Religious  Education,  as 
well  as  in  the  ways  of  organizing  the  home,  the  school  and  the  church 
to  be  training  agencies,  should  be  placed,  by  our  theological  schools, 
on  the  required  list  for  missionary  candidates. 

In  view  of  these  considerations  we  reach  three  generalized  con- 
clusions : 

1.  It  seems  clear  that  a full  seminary  course  is  indispensable  to 
the  largest  efficiency  of  the  ordained  missionary. 

2.  It  also  seems  clear  that  the  missionary  candidate  cannot  afford, 
in  the  use  of  his  privilege  of  electing  studies,  to  omit  any  of  those 
courses  which  are  fundamental  to  a thorough  equipment  of  the  Chris- 
tian ministry  at  home. 

3.  Heretofore,  the  standard  theological  course  has  generally  been 
considered  adequate  to  the  preparation  of  an  ordained  missionary  for 
his  work.  The  soundness  of  this  conclusion  will  be  discussed  by  others. 
Whatever  the  verdict  may  be,  the  theological  schools  should  undertake 
to  furnish  a preparation  for  ordained  missionary  service  which  is  really 
adequate.  Their  goal  should  not  fall  short  of  that  high  pastoral  ideal 
— “that  the  man  of  God  may  be  complete,  furnished  completely  unto 
every  good  work.” 

THE  DISCUSSION 

Dr.  Chamberlain. — It  is  an  interesting  and  significant  fact  and 
one  that  bears  upon  the  present  discussion  that  a memorandum  has 
been  recently  issued  by  a Conference,  similar  to  the  one  in  which  we 
are  at  present  engaged,  and  held,  last  April,  in  England  under  the  aus- 
pices of  the  British  Board  of  Studies  for  the  Preparation  of  Mission- 
aries with  principals  of  theological  colleges  and  training  institutions, 
university  professors,  and  representatives  of  missionary  societies.  In  the 

19 


Findings  of  this  Conference  importance  was  attached  to  the  following 
subjects,  taught  generally  in  British  theological  colleges,  as  contribut- 
ing to  the  preparation  of  ordained  missionaries : Comparative  Religion, 
Church  History,  Biblical  Exegesis,  and  Systematic  and  Apologetic 
Theology.  It  was  also  the  judgment  of  this  Conference  that  every 
missionary  should  know  something  about  educational  methods  and 
Psychology.  In  our  American  theological  seminaries,  courses  which 
are  of  peculiar  value  to  the  missionary  are  being  quite  generally  offered 
now,  also,  in  Sociology  and  Religious  Education.  The  British  Confer- 
ence further  declared  its  belief  that  adequate  preparation  for  service 
abroad  makes  necessary  a year  of  post-graduate  study.  Moreover,  it 
expressed  its  conviction  of  the  importance  of  correlating  carefully  the 
work  of  the  final  year  of  preparation  at  home  with  that  of  the  first 
year  of  preparation  on  the  field. 

Professor  Schermerhorn. — Three  difficulties  meet  us  at  the 
beginning  of  this  discussion:  First,  what  is  a “standard  theological 

curriculum?”  Second,  how  often  does  a Board  determine  well  in  ad- 
vance the  field  in  which  a candidate  is  to  work  ? And  third,  how  can  a 
seminary  plan  a course  of  study  to  equip  a man  for  an  ill-defined  task  ? 
Nevertheless,  any  foreign  missionary,  whatever  his  field,  or  whatever 
his  task,  should  by  all  means  take  certain  studies. 

1.  The  Bible  should  be  foremost  on  the  list  of  the  studies  in  any 
missionary  course.  Every  intending  missionary  should  know  at  least 
three  things  about  the  Bible:  its  history,  its  contents,  and  its  inter- 
pretation. 

2.  Next  to  the  Bible,  I would  place  Church  History,  which  is 
repeating  itself  in  the  several  missionary  fields.  For  example,  note  the 
increasing  tendency  toward  the  union  of  Christians  on  the  mission 
fields,  and  remember  that  in  the  old  days,  when  the  Church  became 
catholic,  she  also  fixed  her  statements  of  doctrine.  Would  Church 
History  teach  us  anything  regarding  this?  The  History  of  Missions 
should  be  included  in  Church  History. 

3.  The  study  of  next  importance  is  Comparative  Religion.  The 
student  should  know  not  only  the  differences  between  Christianity  and 
other  religions,  but  also  the  points  they  hold  in  common.  The  presenta- 
tion of  Comparative  Religion  should  always  include  a presentation  of 
the  life  and  the  civilization  which  are  the  normal  products  of  these 
religions.  Mere  book  study  is  not  enough. 

4.  A fourth  possible  discipline  should  be  practical  work  in  Chris- 
tian service.  If  those  desiring  to  go  abroad  as  missionaries  can  not 
succeed  in  the  preliminary  tasks  undertaken  at  home  while  in  prepara- 
tion, I doubt  the  wisdom  of  their  appointment.  And,  on  the  other 
hand, a good  measure  of  success  here  would  be  a strong  recommendation 
for  appointment  abroad. 

Dr.  Barton. — I wish  to  emphasize  the  statement  made  by  Dr. 
Speer  that  you  can  not  make  preachers  by  putting  them  under  teachers 
who  are  not  themselves  preaching  men.  Again,  it  is  vitally  necessary 
for  the  theological  seminary  to  develop  men  of  creative  ability. 

Dean  Allison. — It  seems  to  me  a very  serious  matter  that  men 

20 


come  up  to  the  seminaries  and  go  through  them,  fully  expecting  to  go 
to  the  foreign  field,  only  to  find  that  they  can  not  be  sent.  The  constant 
repetition  of  this  experience  in  the  seminaries  will  certainly  dull  the 
nerve  of  missionary  enthusiasm.  Not  much  can  be  attempted  in  the 
direction  of  specific  preparation  so  long  as  the  determining  of  the 
question  of  actual  destination  is  postponed  to  the  last  moment.  There 
should  be  a much  closer  co-operation  between  the  Missionary  Boards 
through  their  Candidate  Secretaries  and  the  students  who  are  actually 
in  the  process  of  preparation  for  the  field. 

President  Mackenzie. — We  have  present  with  us  to-day  not  a 
few  who  have  had  actual  experience  in  the  foreign  field.  It  would  be 
helpful  for  us  to  hear  from  them  regarding  the  courses  which  were  of 
material  value  to  them.  We  would  gladly  know  what  courses  they 
found  useless,  and  why;  and  in  what  specific  way  the  seminary  con- 
tributed to  their  later  efficiency. 

Dr.  Endicott. — I was  sixteen  years  in  China.  That  experience 
led  me  to  think  that  the  most  important  result  to  be  sought  in  theological 
training  is  ability  to  present  in  vital  fashion  to  others  the  truths  we  our- 
selves know,  and  also  led  me  to  recognize  that  one  of  the  chief  defects 
of  theological  training  is  seen  in  some  men  who  have  a fairly  extensive 
acquaintance  with  theological  studies,  but  who  are  decidedly  inefficient 
in  expression. 

There  is  a very  picturesque  Chinese  proverb  which  speaks  of  a 
dumpling  boiled  in  a teakettle.  It  is  aimed  at  just  the  defect  to  which 
I have  referred ; that  is  to  say,  there  is  no  difficulty  whatever  experi- 
enced in  getting  the  ingredients  of  the  dumpling  into  the  teakettle. 
The  difficulty  is  met  when  one  attempts  to  pour  the  dumpling  out. 

So  far  as  training  goes,  we  are  probably  producing  superior  schol- 
ars at  home  at  the  present  time,  but  are  we  producing  effective  preach- 
ers of  the  Gospel  ? I have  seen  men  on  the  mission  field  too  poorly  edu- 
cated for  Secretarial  acceptance  by  most  Boards,  who  have  yet  achieved 
what  their  theologically  trained  associates  failed  to  accomplish,  simply 
because  they  gained  such  a mastery  of  the  language  of  the  field  and 
lived  so  close  to  the  people,  that  they  were  able  adequately  and  power- 
fully to  present  the  message  which  they  had  brought. 

The  great  need  on  the  field  is  not  for  men  who  are  qualified  to  be 
theological  professors.  The  need  is  for  preachers  of  the  Gospel.  We 
must  exalt  the  pulpit  and  give  every  student  in  our  theological  institu- 
tions to  understand  that  when  a man  is  taken  from  the  pulpit  and 
placed  in  a theological  chair,  at  home  or  abroad,  it  is  not  an  advance- 
ment, but  merely  an  Irish  promotion. 

Rev.  A.  M.  Sherman. — I would  like  to  suggest  that  the  advis- 
ability of  dropping  Hebrew  from  the  theological  course  of  some  mis- 
sionary candidates  be  given  consideration.  Personally,  I found  that 
Hebrew  at  the  Seminary  took  more  than  its  fair  share  of  time.  It  not 
only  took  four  or  five  hours  a week  in  the  class-room  the  first  year, 
but  it  crowded  every  other  study  during  the  hours  of  preparation  out 
of  the  class-room.  On  going  to  the  foreign  field  and  spending  some 
years  in  the  study  of  a new  and  difficult  language,  I found  Hebrew  of 

21 


little  or  no  practical  use.  The  time  given  to  Hebrew  in  the  theological 
seminary  for  the  majority  of  missionary  candidates  might  better  be 
spent  upon  such  subjects  as  Comparative  Religion,  Sociology,  Peda- 
gogy, Phonetics,  or  Church  History.  There  should  be,  of  course,  some 
Hebrew  scholars  in  every  mission  field;  but  it  is  much  better  to  have 
some  men  specialize  in  Hebrew  than  to  have  the  ordinary  missionary 
spend  a large  part  of  his  preparatory  time  in  the  study  of  a language 
of  which  he  practically  never  makes  use.  I was  interested  in  meeting 
recently  a very  bright  and  promising  missionary  candidate.  He  told 
me  that  he  had  omitted  Hebrew  entirely  and  was  putting  in  his  time 
on  Pedagogy. 

Rev.  Horace  Coleman. — I did  not  take  the  regular  theological 
course  before  going  to  the  field,  but  had  three  years  in  the  Graduate 
and  Divinity  Schools  of  the  University  of  Chicago.  My  work  in 
Sociology  and  in  constructive  Bible  study  has  been  of  great  value  to 
me  as  well  as  my  experience  in  Young  Men’s  Christian  Association 
work.  I feel  like  emphasizing,  therefore,  constructive  Bible  study  and 
practical  experience  in  some  varied  lines  of  Christian  and  social  work. 

During  my  first  furlough  I am  now  studying  the  additional  things 
that  I have  found  are  important,  viz. : Educational  Psychology,  Reli- 
gious Education  in  the  Sunday  School,  Psychology  of  Religion,  History 
and  Philosophy  of  Religion,  and  Christian  Ethics. 

Dr.  Anderson. — My  theological  training  was  always  of  service  to 
me  in  the  field.  My  only  suggestion  would  be  one  of  method.  Theo- 
logical schools  should  aim  more  definitely  to  train  men  to  think  inde- 
pendently. Students  should  be  encouraged,  even  forced,  to  think  things 
out  for  themselves.  Every  missionary  candidate  should  learn  to  stand 
on  his  own  feet.  Let  a seminary  give  a course  which  would  enable  a 
man  to  find  himself,  and  he  will  be  the  truer  missionary. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Robbins. — As  a missionary  in  the  Philippines,  I found 
that  all  of  the  courses  taken  by  me  in  the  theological  seminary,  in- 
cluding Hebrew,  were  of  real  value  to  me  as  a missionary.  Especially 
valuable  were  the  courses  in  the  exegetical  and  historical  study  of  the 
Bible,  Church  History,  and  Homiletics.  Practical  evangelistic  work 
in  a mission  in  Boston  furnished  useful  experience.  A thorough  course 
in  Comparative  Religion  would  have  been  of  great  value  in  preparing 
me  more  adequately  for  missionary  service. 

Dean  Tillett. — I have  listened  with  keen  interest  to  the  mission- 
aries and  would  like  to  say  a word  from  the  point  of  view  of  one  who 
has  spent  forty  years  in  a theological  seminary.  The  seminaries  have 
learned  much  from  visiting  missionaries  and  from  secretaries  who  have 
been  on  the  field.  Their  greatest  inspiration  is  the  call  to  prepare  men 
for  the  work  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  throughout  the  earth. 

I was  deeply  impressed  by  Dr.  Charles  Cuthbert  Hall’s  declaration 
in  one  of  his  published  volumes  after  his  visit  to  the  Orient,  to  the 
effect  that  the  best,  largest,  and  purest  interpretation  of  Christianity 
and  of  the  Christian  religion  would  come  when  the  Orient  turns  to 
Christianity.  Our  larger  vision,  our  principles,  our  policies  have  come 

22 


'and  will  come  through  the  practical  suggestions  which  we  have  been 
hearing. 

Dr.  Mott. — The  object  of  the  whole  missionary  movement  is  to 
make  the  living  Christ,  his  teachings  and  his  principles  known  and 
operative  in  the  lives  of  those  people  to  whom  we  go.  These  results  we 
must  reach  with  wisdom  and  efficiency.  Without  them  all  other  results 
are  disappointing.  My  experience  a year  ago  at  the  conferences  of  the 
Continuation  Committee,  in  listening  to  missionaries  and  in  studying 
their  work  at  first  hand  in  their  stations,  leads  me  to  conclude  that  the 
really  successful  missionaries  are  those  who  not  only  receive  ade- 
quate instruction,  but  also  acquire  some  measure  of  experience.  There 
were  surprisingly  few  who  could  take  part  in  organizing  great  evan- 
gelistic campaigns,  in  training  workers,  and  in  leading  converts  to 
assurance  and  conviction.  It  was  necessary  to  place  chief  dependence 
upon  men  who  had  acquired  such  skill  at  home.  It  would  be  of  great 
value  if  our  theological  institutions  could  give  more  of  this  direct  evan- 
gelistic training.  Judging  by  results,  I make  bold  to  say  that  it  is  one 
of  the  weak  spots  to-day. 


WHAT  ADDITIONAL  COURSES  FOR  SPECIAL  MISSION- 
ARY TRAINING  ARE  ESSENTIAL  FOR  THE  ORDAINED 
MISSIONARY  IF  HE  IS  TO  BE  ADEQUATELY  PRE- 
PARED? 

Reverend  James  L.  Barton,  D.D. 

I approach  this  subject  from  the  standpoint  of  my  own  personal 
experience,  study  and  observation,  and  am  confident  that  the  conclu- 
sions to  which  I have  been  led  will  not  meet  with  the  unanimous  ap- 
proval of  this  Conference.  My  own  conclusions  are  subject  to  revision 
or  reversion  upon  evidence.  As  such  they  are  set  forth  for  friendly 
but  frank  discussion,  in  the  hope  that  it  will  clarify  some  of  the  prob- 
lems we  face  to-day. 

We  may  assume  that  every  theological  seminary  teaches  the  exe- 
gesis of  the  Bible  in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  English,  Biblical  Introduction, 
Church  History,  Ancient,  Medieval  and  Modern,  Systematic  Theology, 
and  Homiletics  or  Preaching  and  Pastoral  Care.  These  subjects  are 
the  minimum  of  theological  instruction.  Many  seminaries  offer  added 
courses  of  varied  values,  such  as  Sociology,  Missions,  and  Comparative 
Religion.  Do  these  courses  offer  an  adequate  theological  preparation 
for  a missionary  wishing  to  enter  the  ordained  service  abroad?  My 
answer  is  in  the  negative. 

We  will  probably  all  agree  that  the  careful  and  systematic  study 
of  Old  and  New  Testament  Introduction,  of  all  aspects  of  general 
Church  History,  and  of  Theology,  in  the  best  use  of  that  term,  should 
be  pursued  by  every  candidate  for  ordination,  whether  he  is  to  serve 
at  home  or  abroad.  We  would  also  undoubtedly  agree  that  the  addi- 
tional courses  offered  by  some  seminaries  in  Sociology,  Missions,  and 

23 


Comparative  Religion  are  essential.  About  three  features  in  most  of 
the  theological  curricula  of  to-day  I am  coming  to  have  questionings, 
if  not  doubts,  concerning  their  necessity  in  the  equipment  of  all  or- 
dained missionaries.  These  are  Greek,  Hebrew,  and  Homiletics  or 
Pastoral  Care. 

Considering  each  of  these  in  turn,  let  me  remind  you,  first  of  all, 
that  it  is  now  possible  to  secure  the  degree  of  B.A.  from  many  colleges 
of  high  standing  without  having  had  any  Greek  at  all;  and  that  an 
increasing  number  of  men  are  entering  theological  schools  with  little  or 
no  knowledge  of  even  the  rudiments  of  the  Greek  language.  Greek 
exegesis  was  incorporated  into  the  theological  curriculum  when  every 
college  graduate  knew  Greek,  and  when  minute  and  mechanical  exact- 
ness of  interpretation  was  regarded  as  essential  to  the  declaration  of 
Biblical  truth.  Neither  is  true  to-day.  In  the  face  of  the  multitude  of 
subjects  demanding  the  attention  of  the  man  who  contemplates  ordained 
service  abroad,  is  it  worth  while  for  him  to  begin  Greek  in  the  semi- 
nary? I would  say  “no,”  unless  he  plans  to  work  among  Greeks  or 
Armenians,  to  teach  theology,  or  to  translate  the  Scriptures. 

Unless  the  missionary  candidate  contemplates  work  where  he  will 
use  Arabic  or  Hebrew  or  some  Semitic  cognate,  it  is  equally  true  that 
Hebrew  should  be  eliminated.  I would,  of  course,  make  an  exception 
for  both  Greek  and  Hebrew  in  the  case  of  men  of  unusual  linguistic 
ability,  who  will  probably  be  called  upon  to  translate  or  revise  previous 
translations  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  vernaculars  of  mission  fields. 
There  is  an  important  place  on  the  mission  field  for  such  men,  and 
they  should  be  given  rich  opportunity  for  the  thorough  mastery  of 
languages  and  linguistic  methods.  Such  men,  however,  are  missionary 
specialists.  The  majority  of  candidates  can  gain  the  discipline  and  the 
other  advantages  of  the  study  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  in  ways  of  far 
more  practical  value. 

Again,  Homiletics  and  Pastoral  Care  is  primarily  intended  to  give 
men  skill  in  preparing  sermons  to  preach,  for  the  most  part,  to  Chris- 
tians, and  to  enable  them  so  to  organize  and  direct  the  affairs  of  a 
church  that  it  may  increase  in  strength  and  power.  The  ordained  mis- 
sionary has  little  or  none  of  this  work  to  do.  He  is  the  pastor  of  no 
church  and  preaches  mostly  to  non-Christians,  where  his  services  are 
more  comparable  to  that  of  a teacher  than  that  of  a pastor.  I am 
confident  that  a thorough  course  in  the  Psychology  of  Teaching  and  in 
Pedagogy  would  be  of  far  greater  and  more  permanent  value  to  the 
ordained  missionary  than  the  ordinary  course  or  courses  in  Homiletics 
and  Pastoral  Care  given  in  our  seminaries. 

Courses  in  Greek,  Hebrew,  and  Homiletics  come  close  to  calling 
for  a half  of  the  precious  time  available  to  the  theological  student.  If 
they  are  eliminated  for  the  average  student,  the  way  is  clear  for  the 
introduction  of  some  additional  courses,  which  will  be  universally 
valuable  to  the  ordained  missionary  working  under  any  Board  or 
Society  and  engaged  in  any  department  of  work  liable  to  come  to  men 
of  that  class.  These  courses  should  be  put  upon  a parity  with  those  of 
all  other  departments  of  the  seminary,  requiring  the  same  thoroughness 

24 


of  preparation  and  completion  for  graduation.  It  goes  without  saying 
that  the  teachers  and  professors  handling  them  should  have  adequate 
equipment  for  their  work. 

The  following  courses  are  suggested  as  supremely  essential  to  the 
proper  equipment  of  the  ordained  missionary: 

1.  A Adore  Complete  Study  of  the  Bible ^ including  Introduction, 
Contents  and  Doctrine,  and  Apologetics. — In  the  main  this  study  should 
be  made  in  English,  with  more  or  less  reference  to  the  original  tongues, 
but  with  the  principal  purpose  of  giving  the  student  a real  mastery  of 
the  whole  Bible.  Few  ordained  missionaries  enter  upon  their  life  work 
with  an  adequate  understanding  of  the  oracles  of  their  own  religion ; 
many  are  strangely  unfamiliar  with  the  contents  of  the  Book  that  con- 
tains the  revelation  they  are  to  teach.  It  would  be  well  if  the  founda- 
tion and  much  of  the  superstructure  of  their  systematic  theolop^  came 
from  the  Bible  direct  rather  than  through  battle-scarred  definitions  and 
doctrines,  handed  down  from  the  past,  many  of  which  stand  for  division 
in  the  Church  of  God  rather  than  for  constructive  co-operation. 

2.  A Practical  and  Thorough  Course  in  the  Art  of  Bible  Teach- 
ing in  Week-day  and  Sunday  Schools. — This  holds  a place  of  impor- 
tance not  second  to  preaching.  The  study  of  the  Bible  under  compe- 
tent instruction  is  rapidly  becoming  the  most  effective  and  practical 
method  of  approach  to  the  mind  and  heart  of  non-Christians.  The  or- 
dained missionary  must  be  able  to  lead  in  the  preparation  of  courses 
of  study,  in  the  training  of  competent  teachers,  and  in  organizing  and 
conducting  schools  and  Bible  classes. 

3.  Comprehensive  and  Practical  Courses  in  the  Psychology  and 
Practice  of  Teaching. — Enough  has  already  been  said  to  make  further 
comment  on  this  topic  unnecessary.  This  is  of  supreme  importance, 
second  to  nothing  else  save  the  study  of  the  Word  of  God  itself. 

4.  The  History  and  Philosophy  of  Religion. — Few  missionaries 
are  now  able  to  secure  adequate  instruction  in  this  most  important  sub- 
ject, and  so  are  compelled  to  enter  upon  their  work  in  the  foreign 
field  with  little  or  no  knowledge  of  the  historic  groping  of  the  race 
after  God  and  the  existence  among  all  peoples  of  a deep-seated  religious 
faculty  and  a real  longing  to  see  and  know  the  true  and  eternal  Spirit. 

5.  Comparative  Religion.  — A thorough  and  comprehensive 
course,  based  not  wholly  upon  information  obtained  from  books,  but 
accompanied  by  the  results  of  personal  observation  and  experience,  will 
be  of  great  assistance  to  every  missionary.  Each  candidate  should  in 
the  seminary  lay  such  a deep  and  broad  foundation  in  this  study  that 
he  will  continue  to  pursue  the  subject  throughout  his  missionary  career. 

6.  Modern  Missions  as  Church  History. — Apart  from  the  first 
three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  and  the  period  of  the  Reformation, 
there  is  no  century  that  begins  to  compare  in  importance  with  the  last 
one  hundred  years  of  modem  missions.  This  subject  is  as  important 
for  the  pastor  at  home  as  for  the  missionary  who  goes  abroad.  It  is 
the  modem  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  It  is  the  story  of  the  Church  in  the 
most  active  and  prosperous  period  of  its  history. 

25 


7.  The  Principles  of  Social  Science. — This  course  should  include 
enough  practical  experience  to  enable  the  missionary  to  apply  these 
principles  to  the  society  in  which  he  will  be  placed.  It  is  imperative 
that,  in  addition  to  the  personal  message  of  the  Gospel,  calling  the 
individual  to  repentance,  the  missionary  should  also  be  alive  to  the 
social  message  that  summons  him  to  live  a Christian  life  in  the  midst 
of  society  and  to  be  a part  of  the  dynamic  which  will  make  that  society 
Christian. 

8.  Phonetics  and  the  Science  of  Language. — The  missionary 
societies  are  becoming  increasingly  alert  to  the  importance  of  the  mas- 
tery by  the  ordained  missionary  of  at  least  one  vernacular  during  the 
first  two  or  three  years  of  his  apprenticeship.  Experience  has  proven 
the  value  of  phonetics  as  a foundation  upon  which  a new  language  can 
be  learned.  There  is  no  demand  for  the  teaching  in  this  country  of  any 
of  the  vernaculars  used  in  the  mission  fields  except,  possibly,  the 
beginning  of  Arabic.  A course  in  phonetics  is  calculated  to  prepare  the 
missionary  not  only  for  the  more  speedy  acquisition  of  a vernacular, 
but  for  its  more  accurate  and  scientific  use  when  once  mastered. 

9.  The  Direction  of  Candidates  in  Missionary  Reading. — This 
presupposes  a practical  modern  missionary  library.  There  is  an  im- 
perative demand  for  direct  assistance  to  candidates  in  their  general 
reading  upon  missionary  themes.  The  seminary  should  provide  for 
courses  of  reading,  beginning  with  the  history  of  the  growth  of  the 
missionary  enterprise,  narrowing  down  ultimately  to  the  country,  peo- 
ple and  religions  with  which  the  candidate  is  to  be  associated,  after 
appointment. 

These  suggestions  apply  equally  to  candidates  for  appointment 
for  ordained  service  in  any  mission  field.  These  topics  are  all  of  su- 
preme importance  for  the  adequate  preparation  of  men  for  the  foreign 
service  and  should  be  provided  by  every  theological  seminary  that 
claims  to  be  fully  equipped  for  this  work.  Some  of  these  courses 
would  be  of  almost  equal  value  to  pastors  in  this  country.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  if  all  seminaries  should  provide  for  the  courses  here  men- 
tioned there  would  still  be  need  of  the  missionary  training  schools  to 
prepare  specialists  and  to  give  specific  instruction  upon  the  science  of 
missions  and  the  different  missionary  countries. 

THE  DISCUSSION 

Bishop  Oldham. — I find  myself  in  considerable  accord  with  Dr. 
Barton  in  his  position  regarding  the  value  of  Hebrew  to  the  missionary. 
I speak  out  of  the  experience  of  a seminary  student,  a missionary,  and 
a missionary  secretary.  I would  not  eliminate  it  as  a subject,  but 
would  favor  some  adjustment  which  would  serve  after  one  year  of 
study  to  weed  out  of  the  Hebrew  classes  all  who  had  not  taken  it  up 
with  enthusiasm. 

I would  add  to  the  usual  studies  of  the  theological  curriculum 
Elementary  Medicine.  Such  knowledge  will  in  some  fields  give  a mis- 
sionary much  influence.  I once  saw  in  Borneo  a Dyak  come  to  the 

26 


missionary’s  house,  whose  head  was  nearly  split  in  two.  The  mission- 
ary was  able  to  give  him  first-aid  treatment.  Some  four  months  later 
I was  there  again  and  found  a man  devoted  to  the  missionary  and  to 
his  Lord.  An  elementary  knowledge  of  medicine  is  valuable  every- 
where. Another  sort  of  knowledge  which  will  be  useful  is  that  of 
business  methods.  Much  positive  misery  is  due  to  the  fact  that  a man, 
highly  educated  at  home  in  larger  matters,  is  often  a blundering  block- 
head with  reference  to  missionary  accounting. 

To  Dr.  Speer’s  Spartanics,  the  cultivation  of  the  quality  which 
subordinates  privilege  to  non-calculated  duty,  which  I,  too,  would 
emphasize,  I would  add  Humanics,  the  quality  which  expresses  itself  in 
loving  sympathy  for  men.  Men  must  have  wide  knowledge,  but  they 
need  these  human  qualities,  too.  Our  whole  church  life  needs  to  be 
vitalized  into  a deeper  sense  of  the  presence  of  God  and  a more  defi- 
nite belief  in  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord. 

Professor  Beach. — May  I say  a word  or  two  concerning  Dr.  Bar- 
ton’s proposed  plan  for  gaining  the  time  in  a regular  seminary  course 
for  the  added  work  which  his  report  proposes  ? 

I believe  very  much  in  Hebrew  and  have  proved  my  faith  by  my 
works  in  that  direction.  Yet  remember  that  we  are  discussing  the 
relative  importance  of  studies  all  of  which  may  be  desirable  but  not 
all  of  which  are  possible.  Dr.  Barton  grants  that  special  men,  who 
are  peculiarly  gifted  linguistically  and  who  may  later  be  used  in  the 
important  work  of  Biblical  translation,  should  take  Hebrew.  For  the 
rest  of  the  candidates,  I am  sure  that  the  relatively  weak  grasp  of 
Hebrew  gained  in  the  average  theological  seminary  is  of  less  value 
than  many  subjects  which,  because  of  the  time  given  to  that  study, 
must  be  given  up.  So  with  reference  to  Greek.  If  the  student  has 
never  had  elementary  Greek  before  going  to  the  seminary  and  must 
there  begin  the  study,  I think  that  his  time  may  be  better  spent  on  some 
of  the  alternates  which  Dr.  Barton  has  presented.  Those  who  have 
had  Greek  in  fitting  school  and  college,  ought,  by  all  means,  to  con- 
tinue it  in  the  seminary. 

Homiletics  has  been  suggested  as  a study  which  might  give  place 
to  courses  more  practically  helpful  to  the  candidate.  That  depends. 
If  Homiletics  is  the  study  of  a mass  of  details  relating  to  our  highly 
organized  ecclesiastical  systems  here  in  America,  it  may  very  profitably 
be  curtailed  or  omitted  for  missionary  candidates.  I hope,  however, 
that  these  men  may  get  as  much  as  their  brethren  who  remain  at  home 
in  the  way  of  the  preparation  and  delivery  of  sermons,  especially,  if 
the  seminary  gives  ample  opportunity  for  extemporaneous  speaking, 
preaching,  and  debate.  Such  training  is  especially  desirable  for  mis- 
sionaries whose  principal  work  in  preaching  will  be  without  the  aid  of 
notes.  Allied  to  this  line  of  study  and  sometimes  included  in  the  work 
of  the  professor  of  Homiletics,  where  a specialist  is  not  procurable, 
is  Voice  Training."  Most  evangelistic  missionaries  spend  hours  at  a 
time  in  speaking  to  crowds,  to  groups  and  individuals.  Unless  they 
learn  how  to  breathe  and  use  the  vocal  organs,  they  will  sufifer  from 
clergyman’s  sore  throat. 

Social  Science  was  recommended  as  a study  to  be  introduced  or  to 

27 


be  studied  by  candidates  while  in  the  seminary.  I question  whether 
the  average  seminary  can  afford  to  have  a professor  who  is  sufficiently 
expert  to  give  better  instruction  than  the  candidate  has  already  had  at 
college;  in  that  case,  I should  hardly  agree  with  Dr.  Barton’s  sugges- 
tion. Yet  it  is  undoubtedly  desirable  to  have  missionary  candidates 
prepared  to  understand  and  make  proper  use  of  the  helpful  knowledge 
derivable  from  the  study  of  sociology,  especially  in  its  societological 
aspects.  The  social  environment  is  too  little  understood  by  most  mis- 
sionaries and  should  be  so  fully  known  that  it  may  be  used  as  a lever 
to  raise  men  Christward. 

I desire  to  add  one  study  which  could  be  introduced  more  easily 
than  some  that  have  been  suggested,  namely,  the  study  of  translations 
of  the  principal  Asiatic  literatures.  This  is  a course  almost  equally 
valuable  for  the  home  minister  and  for  the  missionary.  We  at  home 
preach  occasionally  upon  the  ethnic  faiths,  and  even  more  often  must 
meet  the  critic  of  missions  who  holds  that  the  religions  of  Asia  are 
“good  enough’’  for  Asiatics.  If  our  theological  students  could  read 
translations  of  typical  passages  of  the  various  non-Christian  canons, 
they  would  enlarge  their  own  horizon  and,  at  the  same  time,  be  prepar- 
ing to  answer  such  a criticism.  It  is  even  more  desirable  that  mission- 
ary candidates  should  do  this,  since  many  young  missionaries  are 
plunged  into  the  atmosphere  of  these  religions  with  no  inkling  of  what 
their  sacred  books  actually  have  to  say  upon  the  main  topics  of  religion. 
Too  few  of  them  ever  find  time  to  study  the  classical  languages  of  their 
fields,  except  in  China,  and  so  they  never  do  know  what  the  canons 
contain.  Both  classes  of  students  could  be  helped  by  a course  of  read- 
ings which  could  be  more  easily  arranged  than  most  that  we  have  been 
recommending. 

Let  me  close  with  a word  as  to  Phonetics.  For  satisfactory  results, 
an  expert  teacher  must  be  provided,  as  at  the  Kennedy  School  of  Mis- 
sions, and  at  the  Bible  Teachers’  Training  School.  Where  such  a 
teacher  is  unobtainable,  more  harm  than  good  results.  Indeed,  even 
when  a competent  instructor  is  available,  it  is  a question  whether 
phonetics  are  not  overemphasized.  In  some  fields  or  portions  of  fields, 
the  sounds  are  relatively  easy  to  acquire  with  accuracy.  Is  it  worth 
while  to  spend  any  considerable  amount  of  time  on  a study  which  may 
be  of  no  value  in  the  field  to  be  entered,  if,  in  order  to  get  this  time, 
more  important  work  is  set  aside? 

The  preparation  which  Dr.  Speer  and  Dr.  Oldham  include  under 
such  terms  as  Spartanics  and  Humanics,  seems  to  me  especially  desir- 
able. While  such  work  does  not  come  into  a scholastic  program,  the 
qualities  desired  can  be  taught  by  precept  and  example.  Miss  Small, 
at  her  institution  at  Edinburgh  and  in  her  addresses  at  the  British 
summer  schools  for  missionary  candidates,  is  showing  what  can  be 
accomplished  in  that  direction.  What  our  missionaries  are  is  vastly 
more  important  than  what  they  say,  and  an  emphasis  of  the  ideas 
underlying  those  coined  words  will  revolutionize  some  lives  on  the  field. 


28 


IS  IT  REASONABLE  TO  EXPECT  A THEOLOGICAL  SEMI- 
NARY OR  COLLEGE  TO  PROVIDE  THE  SPECIAL 
TRAINING  NECESSARY  FOR  THE  ORDAINED  MIS- 
SIONARY IN  ADDITION  TO  THE  REGULAR  THEO- 
LOGICAL CURRICULUM  ? 

Professor  Ernest  D.  Burton,  D.D. 

The  Report  of  the  Committee  on  the  Preparation  of  Ordained 
Missionaries,  printed  in  the  Third  Annual  Report  of  this  Board,  con- 
tains a list  of  studies  regarded  as  desirable  to  be  pursued  by  the  pro- 
spective ordained  missionary.  It  omits  some  of  the  more  obvious 
studies  of  the  collegiate  course,  but  those  enumerated  fall  into  three 
classes. 

1.  Studies  that  properly  belong  to  the  undergraduate  collegiate 
course:  Modern  Languages,  Art,  History  of  Civilization,  History  of 
Philosophy,  Psychology,  Pedagogy,  Sociology  and  Civics,  Economics, 
Astronomy,  Biology. 

2.  Studies  that  clearly  belong  to  the  standard  theological  course, 
apart  from  any  special  needs  of  men  preparing  for  foreign  missionary 
service:  Greek  (N.T.),  History  of  Religion,  Comparative  Religion, 
Systematic  Theology,  Church  History,  Apologetics,  the  Bible,  Prin- 
ciples of  Religious  Education.  (The  early  conflict  of  Christianity  with 
heathenism  is  simply  a chapter  of  early  church  history.) 

3.  Then  remain  the  following,  which  are  apparently  inserted  with 
special  reference  to  the  needs  of  the  prospective  missionary: 

(a)  Ethnology  and  anthropology. 

(b)  Political  and  economic  geography, 

(c)  Political,  economic  and  diplomatic  history  of  foreign  mission 
fields. 

(d)  Missions  and  world  movements 

(e)  The  science  of  missions. 

(f)  Missionary  biography. 

(g)  Business  methods. 

(h)  Hygiene,  sanitary  science,  first  aid  to  the  injured. 

(i)  Phonetics. 

Two  omissions  from  this  list  are  noticeable.  The  History  of  Mis- 
sions does  not  appear  at  all.  But  as  it  undoubtedly  belongs  in  the 
second  list  among  studies  which  should  be  accessible  to  all  students 
for  the  ministry,  it  does  not  concern  us  at  this  point.  The  other  omis- 
sion is  more  significant.  No  mention  is  made  of  the  languages  of  mis- 
sion lands.  The  committee  thus  tacitly  gives  assent  to  the  principle 
that  the  study  of  the  language  of  the  land  in  which  a man  is  to  work 
should  be  pursued  in  that  land.  This  is,  I believe,  a sound  decision. 
But  if  to  this  be  added,  in  accordance  with  the  general  trend  of  opin- 
ion, that  such  study  is  to  be  pursued  in  a school  for  newly  arrived 
missionaries,  it  is  reasonable  that  in  this  school  also  should  be  pursued 
the  intensive  study  of  the  history,  literature,  customs,  religion,  and 
political  and  economic  conditions  of  the  land  in  which  the  missionary 
is  to  work.  In  that  case,  we  should  eliminate  from  our  present  con- 
sideration the  third  item  in  the  list:  Political,  Economic  and  Diplo- 

29 


matic  History  of  Mission  Lands.  For  I think  it  may  be  assumed  with- 
out argument  that  it  is  unreasonable  to  expect  the  student,  before  going 
out  to  the  foreign  field,  to  study  the  political,  economic  and  diplomatic 
history  of  all  mission  lands,  to  say  nothing  of  the  difficulty  of  the 
theological  school  offering  so  comprehensive  a series  of  courses. 
Respecting  missionary  biography,  it  is  fair  to  question  whether  it  should 
be  included  in  the  curriculum,  and  not  rather  be  recommended  to  the 
student  to  be  included  in  his  private  reading. 

If,  then,  we  assume  that  the  committee  meant  to  recommend  the 
list  which  they  gave  as  representing  the  general  opinion  of  their  corre- 
spondents, and  omit  the  two  just  named  for  the  reasons  indicated, 
there  remain  as  subjects  needed  by  the  missionary,  but  not  by  the  pas- 
tor, the  following  seven  subjects: 

1.  Ethnology  and  anthropology. 

2.  Political  and  economic  geography. 

3.  Missions  and  world  movements. 

4.  The  science  of  missions. 

5.  Business  methods. 

6.  Hygiene,  sanitary  science,  first  aid  to  the  injured. 

7.  Phonetics. 

Our  question,  then,  is.  Is  it  reasonable  to  expect  theological  schools 
to  provide  instruction  in  these  subjects  for  the  benefit  of  their  students 
who  expect  to  become  missionaries  ? 

It  seems  clear  to  me  that  in  general  we  must  return  a negative 
answer  to  this  question.  It  will  be  at  once  agreed  that  the  seminary 
ought  not  to  offer  these  subjects  to  its  students  unless  it  is  prepared 
to  teach  them  well.  The  first  four  of  them.  Ethnology  and  Anthro- 
pology, Political  and  Economic  Geography,  Missions  and  World 
Movements,  The  Science  of  Missions,  are,  perhaps,  sufficiently  related 
so  that  they  might  all  be  taught  by  one  man.  It  would  not  usually  be  the 
case  that  the  same  man  who  taught  these  subjects  would  be  competent 
to  teach  Phonetics,  nor  likely  that  he  could  give  competent  instruction 
in  Business  Methods,  Sanitary  Science  and  First  Aid  to  the  Injured. 
As  none  of  these  last  named  subjects  is  enough  for  a professorship, 
it  would  be  practically  necessary  to  secure  the  services  for  part  time  of 
some  neighboring  physician  and  lawyer,  or  of  an  instructor  in  a busi- 
ness college.  The  provision  of  these  courses,  therefore,  would,  roughly 
speaking,  call  for  the  appointment  of  one  additional  professor  and  the 
provision  of  some  special  instruction  by  a person  or  persons  outside 
the  faculty. 

In  the  great  majority  of  our  theological  schools,  this  provision 
would  be  made  for  a very  small  number  of  men.  In  a school  connected 
or  closely  associated  with  a University,  the  instruction  in  Ethnology 
and  Anthropology  and  in  Political  and  Economic  Geography,  in  Hy- 
giene, Sanitary  Science,  Business  Methods,  and  in  Phonetics,  might 
be  had  with  little,  if  any,  additional  expense.  In  such  a case,  the 
courses  in  Missions  and  World-Movements  and  in  the  Science  of  Mis- 
sions might,  perhaps,  be  given  by  the  professor  of  Missions,  if  Mis- 
sions is  not  simply  an  adjunct  to  his  principal  task,  and  some  special 
provision  might  then  be  made  for  First  Aid  to  the  Injured. 

30 


A large  theological  school,  having  a considerable  number  of  men 
preparing  for  work  as  foreign  missionaries,  might  very  well  be  war- 
ranted in  appointing  a professor  of  Anthropology,  Geography,  and 
related  subjects,  and  in  securing  outside  instruction  in  Business  Meth- 
ods, Sanitary  Science  and  Phonetics.  But  it  seems  scarcely  possible  to 
doubt  that,  in  the  interests  both  of  economy  and  efficiency,  the  great 
majority  of  our  schools  should  make  no  effort  to  provide  instruc- 
tion in  any  of  these  lines,  but  should  instead  advise  their  students  to 
seek  such  instruction  in  a university  or  in  a school  devoted  specially 
to  the  training  of  missionaries,  where  there  would,  presumably,  be 
enough  students  in  these  subjects  to  warrant  the  employment  of  com- 
petent instructors.  To  put  upon  the  several  theological  schools  the 
responsibility  for  the  teaching  of  all  these  subjects  is  to  tempt  them 
to  lay  the  burden  upon  professors  already  covering  a field  as  wide  as 
they  can  deal  with  successfully,  with  the  inevitable  result  of  deteriora- 
tion in  the  character  of  their  work,  or  to  compel  them  to  spend  an 
amount  of  money  out  of  proportion  to  the  results  to  be  achieved. 

I have  thus  far  taken  it  for  granted  that  the  theological  school 
will  not  undertake  to  teach  such  distinctly  collegiate  subjects  as 
Astronomy,  Biology,  Psychology,  etc.,  which  find  a place  in  the  list 
just  named  above.  This  assumption  is,  I think,  most  just.  But  it  is 
to  be  remembered  that  many  students  who  come  to  our  theological 
schools  will  not  have  taken  all  the  studies  in  that  list  in  college,  and, 
in  many  cases,  will  not  discover  their  need  of  them  till  they  are  in  the 
midst  of  their  theological  course.  The  necessity  that  will  thus  arise 
that  the  student  should  turn  to  some  other  than  his  theological  school 
to  complete  his  preparation  for  missionary  service,  furnishes  an  addi- 
tional reason  why  such  a school  should  not  add  the  studies  of  the  third 
list  to  its  curriculum.  For  it  will  usually  be  possible  for  the  student 
to  find  in  the  same  or  adjacent  schools  instruction  both  in  those  studies 
which  he  needs  from  the  third  list  and  those  which  he  lacks  from  the 
first.  To  provide  the  latter  will  only  tempt  him  to  do  without  the  first. 

Two  years  ago  I answered  in  the  negative  the  question  whether 
the  standard  theological  course  should  be  lengthened  to  four  years  in 
order  to  provide  adequate  instruction  in  missions.  I am  constrained 
to  return  the  same  answer  to  the  present  question,  and  to  advise  that, 
in  general,  the  theological  seminaries  do  not  undertake  to  offer  those 
special  studies  which,  though  needed  by  the  prospective  missionary, 
are  not  required  by  their  other  students ; but  that,  if  these  courses  are 
not  available  in  some  immediately  adjoining  college  or  university,  they 
advise  their  students  to  supplement  their  course  in  the  theological 
school  by  a short  period  of  study  in  a missionary  training  school  or 
other  institution  offering  the  courses  which  they  need  to  supplement 
those  taken  in  the  college  and  seminary. 

THE  DISCUSSION 

Principal  O’Meara. — I am  a hearty  believer  in  the  well-equipped 
school  of  missions.  In  a few  strong  and  well-chosen  centers,  we  should 
aim  at  providing  not  only  opportunities  for  lectures,  but  institutions 

31 


which  are  devoted  to  the  special  work  of  missionary  training  on  its 
more  technical  side.  Every  course,  however,  in  all  our  theological 
seminaries  should  be  of  such  a nature  as  to  serve  the  cause  of  world- 
wide evangelization.  To  minister  to  the  need  of  the  world  should  be 
the  objective  of  every  seminary.  The  institution  which  uses  its  equip- 
ment and  staff  with  the  broadest  outlook  and  most  catholic  spirit  is 
the  one  which  most  helpfully  serves  its  local  purpose. 

Thorough  missionary  training  should  include  the  elements  of 
social  service  and  of  the  science  of  teaching.  It  should  also  include 
the  History  of  Missions  and  a thorough  mastery  of  the  English  Bible. 
A missionary  leader  in  China  of  eighteen  years’  experience,  in  writing 
to  me  recently,  remarked:  “We  need  men  of  wide  outlook,  well- 

educated  and  thoroughly  equipped;  but,  in  particular,  send  us  men 
who  know  their  English  Bibles  and  can  use  them  when  they  come  into 
contact  with  the  heathen.”  Pastoral  efficiency  is  needed  and  the  ability 
not  only  to  preach  in  the  ordinary  acceptation  of  the  term,  but  to 
debate  and  conduct  an  argument  in  the  midst  of  hostile  and  questioning 
crowds.  Such  preparation  as  this  our  theological  institutions  should 
give.  For  technical  preparation  in  medicine,  education,  or  special 
language  study,  it  is  of  pressing  importance  that  we  should  have  our 
schools  of  missions. 

Reverend  George  Drach. — The  theological  seminary  is  the  train- 
ing school  for  the  laborers  in  the  vineyard  of  the  Lord,  the  ministers 
of  the  Church,  both  at  home  and  abroad.  An  efficient  seminary  must 
furnish  an  adequate  supply  of  trained  men  for  both  fields.  The  first 
theological  schools,  the  catechetical  schools  of  the  ante-Nicene  fathers, 
sought  to  meet  the  missionary  as  well  as  the  pastoral  needs  of  the 
Church  of  their  day ; and  if  our  modem  seminaries  have  failed  to  pro- 
vide for  the  training  of  missionaries,  it  is  because  they  have  lacked  the 
missionary  vision  and  spirit. 

Because  the  functions  of  the  holy  ministry  are  essentially  the  same 
everywhere  and  always,  the  institution  which  is  established  and  main- 
tained by  the  Church  to  prepare  men  to  administer  this  sacred  office, 
must  provide  the  instruction  which  will  fit  them  for  service  in  any 
field  to  which  they  may  be  called,  whether  it  be  in  a settled  pastorate 
at  home,  or  in  some  foreign  mission  field. 

To  each  of  the  four  main  divisions  of  theology — exegetical,  dog- 
matic, historical,  and  practical — the  science  of  missions  is  closely  re- 
lated. We  need  the  full  equipment  of  every  seminary,  yet  every 
theological  professor  should  be  a teacher  of  missions,  even  where  a 
chair  of  the  science  and  practice  of  missions  exists. 

Every  theological  student  should  study  missions.  It  would  be  far 
wiser  to  prepare  students  for  entrance  into  either  field  of  service,  home 
or  foreign,  letting  the  call  finally  determine  which  shall  be  their  work, 
rather  than  to  select  a few  men  at  the  beginning  of  the  theological 
course  to  be  specially  trained  for  foreign  mission  work.  The  study 
of  missions  should  not  be  an  appendix  to  a theological  curriculum,  not 
even  a graduate  opportunity,  but  an  integral  part  of  the  regular  work. 

In  Germany  there  are  many  schools  which  aim  to  prepare  for  the 

32 


foreign  field  men  who  have  had  no  university  training.  We  have  quite 
a number  of  these  training  schools  whose  standards  are  low.  We 
should,  insist,  I believe,  on  a thorough  theological  education  for  or- 
dained men.  To  that  end,  we  must  encourage  our  seminaries  to  fur- 
nish adequate  opportunities  for  missionary  candidates. 

Many  advantages  would  result  from  regular  instruction  in  mis- 
sions for  all  theological  students.  Those  who  remain  at  home  would 
have  as  good  a theoretical  knowledge  as  those  who  go  abroad,  and 
would,  therefore,  be  more  definitely  in  sympathy  with  those  out  in  the 
field.  The  work  of  foreign  missions  would  more  naturally  be  included 
in  the  mind  of  the  whole  Church  as  an  integral  part  of  its  work.  For- 
eign missionaries  would  be  the  living  links  between  the  great  enterprise 
to  which  they  have  given  their  lives  and  their  fellow  alumni  at  home. 


ASSUMING  THAT  IT  IS  THE  FUNCTION  OF  A THEOLOGI- 
CAL INSTITUTION  TO  PROVIDE  THE  SPECIAL  TRAIN- 
ING NECESSARY  FOR  THE  ORDAINED  MISSIONARY, 
(1)  SHALL  THE  CURRICULUM  BE  SO  MODIFIED  THAT 
THE  MISSIONARY  CANDIDATE  MAY  SECURE  THE 
SPECIAL  MISSIONARY  TRAINING  WITHIN  THE 
THREE  YEARS  ORDINARILY  DEVOTED  TO  THEO- 
LOGICAL STUDY,  OR  (2)  SHALL  A FOURTH  YEAR  BE 
DEVOTED,  EXCLUSIVELY,  TO  SPECIAL  MISSIONARY 
TRAINING? 

Reverend  Professor  Charles  R.  Erdman,  D.D. 

To  further  the  discussion  of  this  important  problem,  I will  pre- 
sent seven  considerations,  in  view  of  which  it  may  seem  wise  to  en- 
deavor to  secure  for  missionary  candidates  a fourth  year  of  special 
instruction  rather  than  to  attempt  so  to  modify  existing  curricula  as 
to  make  this  special  training  a part  of  the  usual  three  years’  course 
of  study. 

Before  presenting  these  considerations,  however,  it  may  be  helpful 
to  make  a few  preliminary  statements,  upon  which,  in  all  probability, 
there  will  be  general  agreement ; and  which,  if  kept  in  mind,  may  give 
increased  clearness  and  definiteness  to  the  debate. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  admitted  that  all  seminaries  should  provide 
missionary  instruction  of  such  a character  that  all  graduates,  whether 
they  are  to  labor  as  ministers  at  home  or  abroad,  will  be  intelligent  and 
enthusiastic  leaders  of  the  missionary  enterprise.  Such  provision  will 
necessarily  modify  the  present  curricula  of  many  seminaries ; but  such 
modification  is  imperative.  The  missionary  instruction  will  include 
some  of  the  branches  usually  classified  under  the  caption  of  “special 
missionary  training,”  as,  for  example,  the  History  of  Religion,  Com- 
parative Religion,  Pedagogy,  Sociology,  the  Science  and  History  of 

33 


Missions.  Evidently,  as  such  instruction  is  increased  in  the  regular 
three  years’  course  of  the  seminary,  there  will  be  less  and  less  need  of 
a fourth  year.  However,  this  discussion  is  to  proceed  on  the  hypothe- 
sis that,  in  addition  to  all  such  general  missionary  training,  an  amount 
of  special  training  equal  to  a full  year  of  study  is  still  needed ; and  the 
question  before  us  is  whether  such  special  and  technical  training  in 
languages,  history,  customs,  conditions,  and  problems  of  particular 
fields,  should  form  a fourth  year  of  study,  or  should  displace  parts  of 
existing  courses  so  as  to  be  included  in  the  usual  three  years  of  theo- 
logical instruction. 

It  is  further  admitted  that  the  establishment  of  schools  on  the 
foreign  field  for  the  special  training  of  newly  appointed  missionaries 
will  vitally  affect  the  final  solution  of  our  problem.  A number  of  such 
schools  are  already  in  existence.  The  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation 
at  its  second  annual  meeting  declared  in  favor  of  the  multiplication  of 
such  institutions,  (see  Report,  p.  51)  ; and  a special  committee,  ap- 
pointed by  the  Continuation  Committee  of  the  World  Missionary  Con- 
ference, is  concerned  with  furthering  their  development.  The  increase 
of  these  institutions  will  certainly  render  less  necessary  the  provision 
by  our  seminaries  of  specialized  missionary  training,  and,  least  of  all, 
of  a fourth  year  for  such  training.  We  are  discussing,  however,  a 
hypothetical  question ; whatever  such  schools  on  the  field  may  or  may 
not  be  doing,  in  case  a theological  school  at  home  is  to  give  an  adequate 
special  training  for  the  field,  should  this  be  attempted  during  the  three 
years,  or  in  a fourth  year  of  the  theological  course? 

In  the  third  place,  it  is  evident  that,  in  any  event,  not  all  seminaries 
should  be  expected  to  give  such  a fourth  year  of  special  training  as  is 
advocated  in  this  paper.  Such  technical  instruction  is  expensive,  and 
should  be  exact  and  scientific.  It  should  not  be  attempted  by  insti- 
tutions which  lack  equipment  and  endowments  for  such  work.  Nor  is 
there  need  of  imposing  such  a burden  on  all  institutions.  Missionary 
candidates  form  only  a small  fraction  of  the  whole  body  of  ministerial 
students,  and  their  specialized  training  might  well  be  undertaken  by  a 
small  number  of  the  stronger  institutions  representing  certain  denomi- 
nations or  localities.  However,  our  problem  is  to  determine  whether 
any  institution  which  undertakes  to  give  technical,  specialized  mission- 
ary training,  should  do  so  as  a part  of  its  present,  but  necessarily  modi- 
fied, curriculum,  or  as  a fourth  year  of  study. 

So,  too,  it  is  evident  that  not  every  missionary  candidate  could 
afford  to  take  a fourth  year  of  study  in  a theological  institution.  To 
many  the  expenditure  of  time  and  money  would  appear  prohibitive. 
After  the  long  years  of  school  and  college  and  seminary  work  candi- 
dates are  naturally  impatient  of  any  further  delay,  and  are  often  under 
financial  obligations  which  they  should  be  unwilling  to  increase.  It  is, 
of  course,  true,  on  the  other  hand,  that  an  expenditure  of  time  in 
preparation  is  usually  a saving  of  time  in  the  years  of  service ; that  the 
financial  demands  of  the  usual  theological  year  are  quite  moderate; 
and  that  many  candidates  have  gone  to  the  field,  and  many  will  con- 
tinue to  do  so,  with  imperfect  training,  not  only  in  technical  missionary 
subjects,  but  in  academic  and  theological  disciplines.  Our  problem  is 

34 


to  consider  an  ideal,  and  to  ask  whether  those  candidates  who  are 
willing  to  pay  the  price,  will  be  better  prepared  for  missionary  service 
by  taking  a fourth  year  of  special  study,  or  by  substituting  this  techni- 
cal training  for  a part  of  the  usual  theological  course. 

In  the  fifth  place,  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that  by  private  reading 
and  study  during  the  three  years  of  theological  training,  and,  especially, 
during  the  long  summer  vacations,  much  can  be  accomplished  by  a 
missionary  volunteer  in  the  line  of  preparation  which  will  be  invaluable 
to  him  in  his  future  work.  We  are  dealing,  however,  with  such 
specialized  training  in  phonetics,  languages,  religions,  and  similar  sub- 
jects, as  demands  instruction  of  the  most  exact  and  scientific  character. 

So,  too,  it  is  evident  that  extra-curriculum  and  elective  courses  can 
afford  considerable  training  in  such  special  lines.  In  some  instances, 
they  are  so  employed  at  present;  but,  usually,  elective  courses  are  re- 
garded as  a needed  supplement  to  the  disciplines  of  the  required  theo- 
logical curriculum;  and  the  question  before  us  is  whether,  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  regular  curriculum,  these  courses  should  be  multiplied,  or 
whether  they  should  form  the  substance  of  a fourth  year  of  study.  We 
are  asked  to  supply  the  equivalent  of  a year  of  special  training;  shall 
it  be  secured  by  reducing  the  theological  curricula  by  one-third  in  their 
content,  or  by  adding  one-third  to  their  allotted  time? 

With  these  preliminary  statements  in  mind,  the  following  con- 
siderations are  suggested  as  favoring  a fourth  year,  devoted  exclusively 
to  special  missionary  training,  for  missionary  candidates  who  have 
previously  completed  the  usual  three  years  of  theological  study : 

1.  The  Brevity  of  Theological  Training. — While  this  period  of 
study  is  nominally  three  years,  it  is  actually  less  than  half  that  time  in 
length.  In  American  theological  institutions,  after  deducting  the  five 
months  of  summer  vacation,  the  two  weeks  at  Christmas,  and  the  time 
spent  in  examinations,  the  “year”  of  study  is  found  to  be  scarcely  six 
months.  To  this  consideration  must  be  added  the  fact  that  theological 
students  universally  allow  more  serious  interruptions  to  their  weekly 
work  than  do  the  students  of  other  professional  schools.  The  “week- 
end” is  very  frequently  spent  in  filling  preaching  engagements,  which 
not  only  demand  time  and  strength  in  their  performance,  but  demand 
portions  of  other  days  for  preparation.  Furthermore,  during  the  week, 
work  outside  of  the  seminary  is  frequently  assumed.  All  these  labors 
may  be  regarded  as  profitable,  even  necessary  training  for  their  life 
work ; but  they  mean  a definite  lessening  of  the  time  actually  devoted  to 
study,  and  suggest  a “year”  which  is  less  than  six  months  in  length, 
and  a “three  years’  course”  which  is  actually  less  than  eighteen  months 
in  length.  If,  then,  this  period  is  abbreviated  by  one-third,  to  make 
room  for  “special  missionary  training,”  there  would  be  left  but  twelve 
jrnonths  of  true  theological  study  in  the  preparation  of  ordained  mis- 
sionaries. This  allotment  of  time  seems  to  be  inadequate.  Instead  of 
shortening ^the  present  course,  then,  let  us  try  to  secure  the  addition  of 
a fourth  “year,”  of  six  or  seven  months,  for  technical  missionary 
training. 


35 


2.  The  Character  of  the  Theological  Course. — It  is  such  as  to 
demand  at  least  the  amount  of  time  assigned  to  it  at  present. 

(a)  It  is  a difficult  course.  Contrary  to  the  popular  opinion,  which 
is  supported  by  many  attempted  “short-cuts  to  the  ministry,”  a theo- 
logical curriculum  includes  the  consideration  of  the  most  serious  prob- 
lems which  have  ever  confronted  the  human  mind;  and,  if  properly 
constructed,  is  so  wide  in  its  scope  as  to  include  disciplines  demanding 
for  their  pursuit  fully  as  much  time  as  is  given  to  preparation  of  medi- 
cine or  the  law.  The  very  essence  of  the  theological  course  is  such 
that  it  demands  time  for  deliberate  thought,  and  its  value  is  utterly 
destroyed  by  crowding  and  haste.  It  will  not  be  denied  that  many 
existing  lecture  systems  reduce  the  work  of  theological  students  to  the 
low  level  of  mere  memorizing  of  dictations;  but  to  shorten  the  time 
allowed  for  the  course  would  only  increase  existing  evils  and  hamper 
the  best  work  now  being  done. 

(b)  It  is  a fundamental  course  and  can  not  be  materially  short- 
ened. Contrary  to  the  belief  of  the  usual  critic  of  theological  educa- 
tion, the  course  is  not  technical  and  specialized,  so  that  part  of  it  can  be 
omitted  by  a man  who  is  to  labor  at  home,  and  part  by  the  man  who  is 
to  labor  abroad.  There  is  a popular  delusion  that  large  portions  of  the 
course  are  designed  to  prepare  specifically  for  the  work  of  home  pas- 
torates. As  a matter  of  fact,  even  the  small  fraction  of  the  course, 
known  as  “Pastoral  Theology,”  deals  with  principles  of  Christian  work 
and  religious  activity  which  are  not  only  of  wide  application,  but  are 
frequently  prized  most  of  all  by  candidates  for  foreign  missionary  ser- 
vice. Surely  the  main  body  of  the  theological  course  is  of  such  a 
character  that  to  omit  one-third  of  its  content  to  make  a place  for 
technical  missionary  training,  would  mean  for  the  missionary  candidate 
a serious  loss  of  fundamental  theological  preparation.  One  must,  of 
course,  speak  with  modest  reserve  of  the  content  of  an  ideal  theologi- 
cal curriculum.  Certain  changes  seem  inevitable.  Yet  even  the  most 
radical  reformers  are  not  advocating  fewer  courses  so  much  as  sub- 
stituted courses.  The  study  of  the  ancient  languages  is  regarded  by 
many  as  antiquated.  The  greatest  satisfaction  is  expressed  when  stu- 
dents no  longer  acquire  even  the  rudiments  of  Hebrew,  so  that  they 
are  debarred  from  the  use  of  the  best  commentaries  and  enjoy  the 
liberty  of  interpreting  the  psalms  and  prophecies  quite  independently 
of  the  meaning  of  the  original  writers.  Yet  even  those  most  gratified 
by  the  extinction  of  Hebrew  and  Greek  professors,  interpret  their  joy 
in  terms  of  the  possibility,  not  of  less  study,  but  of  larger  opportunity 
for  more  “practical  courses.”  However,  the  content  of  the  course  may 
be  changed,  few  thoughtful  men  advocate  the  lessening  of  this  content, 
or  regard  with  hope  the  day  when  graduates  in  theology  will  be  more 
ignorant  than  at  present. 

3.  The  Imperfect  Preparation  of  Candidates. — A third  considera- 
tion against  lessening  the  time  now  allowed  for  specific  theological 
study  is  found  in  the  increasing  crowding  of  the  course  due  to  the 
imperfect  preparation  of  candidates  for  the  course.  This  deficiency 
is  commonly  found,  even  in  the  case  of  intending  missionaries,  to  in- 

36 


dude  lack  of  training  in  Rhetoric,  History,  and  other  academic,  and 
even  elementary  branches;  but  the  defect  is  most  serious  in  three  par- 
ticulars. (1)  Philosophy  has  not  been  studied;  or,  more  unfortunately 
still,  it  has!  The  instruction,  so  commonly  given  in  colleges  and  uni- 
versities, based  upon  a purely  naturalistic  theory  of  the  universe,  forms 
a poor  introduction  to  the  study  of  theism;  of  Christianity,  still  worse; 
of  Christian  missions,  worst  of  all.  The  necessity  of  laying  even  a 
ground-work  of  true  metaphysical  and  philosophic  conceptions  is 
placing  ever  increasing  burdens  on  such  departments  as  those  of  Apolo- 
getics and  Systematic  Theology.  (2)  Greek  is  truly  an  “unknown 
tongue”  to  an  increasing  majority  of  men  who  enter  our  schools  of 
theology.  The  necessity  of  providing  instruction  in  the  elements  of 
this  language  is  making  ever  greater  demands  upon  hours  and  energies 
formerly  devoted  to  theological  study.  Of  course,  many  feel  that  the 
study  of  Greek  is  not  necessary  for  success  in  the  ministry,  and  that 
men  should  be  ordained  to  teach  Christianity  although  ignorant  of 
New  Testament  exegesis.  The  fact  remains  that,  whether  required  or 
not,  Greek  is  still  desired  by  a large  number  of  candidates,  and  it  is  a 
serious  question  whether  it  should  be  denied  even  to  those  who  are  to 
labor  on  the  foreign  field.  (3)  The  most  serious,  if  the  most  surpris- 
ing, defect  in  the  preliminary  training  of  candidates  for  the  ministry  is 
discovered  in  their  ignorance  of  the  contents  of  the  English  Bible. 
Professor  Phelps  has  been  quoted  as  saying  that  “in  reference  to  the 
Bible,  the  ignorance  of  university  students  is  absolute  and  profound.” 
Whether  the  quotation  is  accurate  or  not,  the  correctness  of  the  senti- 
ment will  be  avowed  by  many  less  famous  authorities,  who  will  affirm 
that  the  ignorance  alleged  is  not  cured  by  the  university  courses,  nor 
by  the  stimmer  vacation  which  intervenes  between  the  graduation  in 
the  spring  and  the  entrance  into  the  seminary  in  the  fall.  Some  at- 
tempts at  remedying  these  serious  defects  are  beginning  to  be  made 
in  certain  of  our  seminaries,  but  it  is  admitted  that  even  the  little  time 
allowed  for  these  attempts  is  taken  from  the  other  theological  disci- 
plines. It  is  this  increasing  demand  for  time,  due  to  imperfect  prepara- 
tion, that  raises  the  question  whether  it  would  be  wise  to  shorten,  by 
introducing  technical  missionary  training,  a theological  course  already 
so  overburdened. 

4.  The  Lateness  of  Missionary  Decisions. — The  lateness  of  the 
decision  to  enlist  in  missionary  service  and  the  delay  of  missionary 
societies  in  appointing  candidates  to  specific  fields,  are  strong  con- 
siderations for  postponing  “special  missionary  training”  until  a “gradu- 
ate” or  fourth  year.  If  students  for  the  ministry  do  not  decide  to  en- 
list for  foreign  service  until  the  end  of  their  second  or  third  year  in 
the  seminary,  it  is  obvious  that  a fourth  year  of  special  training  must 
be  provided  for  them;  so,  too,  if  mission  boards  do  not  assign  candi- 
dates to  special  fields  until  their  theological  course  is  nearly  or  quite 
completed,  the  seminary  must  provide  a further  year  for  their  special 
training;  if,  as  we  are  supposing,  the  training  is  to  be  done  by  the 
seminary. 

It  is  true  that  the  Student  Volunteer  Movement  and  other  agen- 

37 


cies  are  doing  much  to  hasten  decisions,  and  enlist  men  who  are  in 
academic  and  collegiate  training;  but  it  will  probably  always  be  the 
case  that  many  of  the  strongest  men  will  decide  during  their  seminary 
courses  to  volunteer  for  the  foreign  field;  and  if,  as  suggested,  no 
fourth  year  of  study  is  provided,  they  will  be  denied  all  or  an  integral 
part  of  the  special  training  they  need. 

So,  too,  the  Mission  Boards  are  probably  doing  the  best  they  can 
under  the  conditions,  but  the  time  is  not  near  when  they  can  so  arrange 
that  the  constant  emergencies  on  the  various  fields  will  not  demand  the 
selection  of  men  who  are  far  on  in  their  theological  training,  for  the 
special  needs  and  the  definite  fields.  It  is,  indeed,  during  the  very 
course  of  theological  study  that  specific  aptitudes  are  developed  and 
discovered  which  lead  to  the  specific  appointments.  How  evident, 
then,  that  a further  year  of  study  should  be  provided  to  prepare  for 
these  particular  places  and  forms  of  missionary  service. 

In  this  matter  of  delay,  probably,  the  candidates  are  more  at  fault 
than  the  Boards,  if  “fault”  there  be.  It  is  the  fact  with  which  we 
are  concerned.  Secretary  Speer  was  speaking  for  the  Boards  when  he 
emphasized  “the  very  great  difficulty  of  getting  men  and  women  to 
commit  themselves  to  going  to  the  mission  field  a long  time  in  advance 
of  the  actual  period  at  which  they  go.”  The  theological  students 
wanted  to  put  off  the  decision  “until  near  the  end  of  their  seminary 
course.”  (See  Report  of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation,  1912, 
p.  45.)  If,  then,  any  considerable  number  of  students  do  not  decide 
upon  foreign  missionary  service  until  late  in  their  seminary  course,  it 
would  be  an  injury  to  the  course  and  an  injustice  to  candidates  to 
shorten  the  course  of  theological  training  by  changing  the  curriculum 
of  studies  to  include  the  needed  special  missionary  training.  The  need 
of  these  students  could  only  be  met  by  a fourth  year  devoted  exclu- 
sively to  such  special  missionary  training. 

5.  The  Economy  of  a Fourth  Year. — This  last  consideration  sug- 
gests the  great  advantage  from  the  point  of  view  of  economy  of  a 
fourth  year  of  special  training  for  all  missionary  candidates ; not  that 
the  provision  of  a fourth  year  would  be  less  expensive  than  the  method 
of  an  altered  three  years’  course,  if  the  latter  met  the  whole  need;  the 
reverse  might  be  true;  but  since  some  candidates  must  have  a fourth 
year  because  of  late  decisions  and  appointments,  evidently  it  will  be 
less  expensive  in  time,  money  and  effort  to  provide  the  one  necessary 
method  than  to  provide  both. 

But  the  point  of  economy  is  more  obvious  from  another  point  of 
view.  An  institution  which  offered  a “fourth  year  of  special  mission- 
ary training,”  would  be  patronized  by  students  of  many  different  de- 
nominations and  shades  of  religious  belief ; but  if  the  special  training 
is  made  a part  of  a three  years’  course  of  theological  training,  then 
only  those  students  could  be  expected  who  felt  that  the  institution 
represented  their  exact  opinions  and  creeds.  Such  an  arrangement 
would  compel  practically  every  sectarian  and  denominational  college, 
no  matter  how  small,  to  provide  this  specialized  training,  or,  what 
would  more  commonly  result,  to  allow  its  graduates  to  go  to  the  field 

38 


unprepared  for  their  work.  Economy,  therefore,  suggests  that  it  will 
be  cheaper  for  any  institution  to  provide  one  form  of  instruction  than 
two;  and  for  a few  institutions  to  furnish  the  needed  preparation, 
than  for  all. 

6.  The  Demand  for  Greater  Efficiency. — Another  consideration 
to  be  submitted  is  the  demand  for  increased  efficiency  made  upon 
seminary  graduates,  whether  they  are  to  labor  at  home  or  abroad. 
This  demand  suggests  that  a shortening  of  the  seminary  curriculum 
for  the  introduction  of  special  missionary  training  would  be  less  wise 
than  the  provision,  for  such  training,  of  a fourth  seminary  year. 

The  old  question  emerges  as  to  the  proper  content  of  a theological 
curriculum;  but  most  educators  would  agree  that  it  should  include  the 
departments  of  Biblical  Literature,  of  Christian  Doctrine,  of  Church 
History,  of  Apologetics,  and  of  practical  methods  of  Christian  work. 
However  these  may  be  termed  or  thought  to  include,  the  conditions  of 
the  modern  world  call  for  an  enlargement  rather  than  a lessening  of 
the  emphasis  placed  upon  each  of  them  in  present  seminary  curricula. 
( 1 ) As  to  Biblical  Literature,  the  world  has  never  known  an  age  when 
problems  of  Biblical  criticism  were  so  acute  and  pressing.  These 
problems  form  the  substance  of  newspaper  editorials  even  in  Cairo  and 
Japan.  The  theological  student  must  know  to-day  what  he  believes  and 
why,  and  what  others  believe  as  well.  (2)  Christian  Doctrine,  or 
Systematic  Theology,  has  assumed  protean  shapes  of  late.  Never  was 
it  so  necessary  as  to-day  for  a Christian  missionary  to  have  a message 
and  to  be  able  to  define  the  message  in  terms  intelligible  to  the  modern 
mind.  (3)  Church  History  needs  to  be  studied  to  guard  the  present 
generation  against  the  re-appearance  of  exploded  heresies  which  troub- 
led generations  of  the  past;  and  to  be  vastly  enlarged  to  include  the 
history  of  religion  as  well  as  the  history  of  doctrine  and  of  missions. 
(4)  Apologetics  must  be  recast  in  form  and  broadened  in  scope  to 
confront  modern  attitudes  of  rationalistic  attacks,  and  to  meet  the 
claims  of  the  great  ethnic  faiths.  (5)  Practical  Theology  is  continu- 
ally widening  its  field  to  prepare  Christian  ministers  for  changed  con- 
ditions and  to  equip  them  with  the  best  methods  for  work  in  dififering 
and  difficult  fields. 

With  the  increased  demand  made  by  the  great  social  and  religious 
world  movements  of  our  day,  would  it  be  wise,  for  any  reasons  what- 
ever, to  so  alter  our  theological  curricula  as  to  make  way  for  a year  of 
specialized  work,  unless  we  add  a corresponding  year  of  time  for  study? 

7.  The  Technical  Character  of  Missionary  Training. — A last 
consideration  is  the  necessity  for  special  technical  missionary  training 
of  a really  high  order.  The  recognition  of  this  need  was  a prime 
factor  in  bringing  into  being  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation. 
There  was  little  thought  of  changing  the  fundamental  theological  dis- 
ciplines, but  provision  was  sought  for  furnishing  the  lines  of  special 
study  which  were  not  needed  by  ministers  at  home,  but  were  indis- 
pensable to  men  who  were  to  labor  as  missionaries.  These  studies 
have  been  considered  by  the  Board  of  Missionary  Preparation  to  be  so 
numerous  and  so  important  as  to  demand  at  least  one  year  of  time  from 

39 


every  candidate.  We  are  now  suggesting  that  this  year  of  time  should 
not  be  taken  from  the  three  years  of  theological  training,  but  should 
form  a fourth  year  to  the  previous  theological  course.  To  attempt 
to  take  the  time  from  the  established  theological  curricula  would  im- 
peril the  special  training  we  are  seeking  to  insure. 

In  case  these  technical  missionary  branches  are  compelled  to  fight 
their  way  into  existing  curricula,  delay  is  certain  to  occur.  Theo- 
logical faculties  are  notoriously  conservative  and  are  certain  to  opp>ose 
innovations  which  threaten  to  lessen  the  time  now  given  to  their 
various  disciplines.  It  is  unfair  to  the  special  missionary  studies  to 
bring  them  into  unnecessary  competition  with  established  courses. 
They  will  be  in  peril  of  being  slighted  and  hampered  in  their  growth 
and  development.  To  introduce  a fourth  year  would  meet  with  the 
general  approval  and  hearty  support  of  all  faculties  in  institutions  so 
equipped  and  endowed  as  to  make  such  a fourth  year  possible.  It  is, 
then,  in  the  interest  not  so  much  of  the  existing  theological  curricula 
as  of  special  missionary  training  that  we  advocate,  for  such  training, 
the  establishment  of  the  fourth  year. 

Such  are  some  of  the  considerations  which  may  well  be  considered 
as  favoring  the  endeavor  to  provide,  in  certain  of  our  theological 
institutions,  a fourth  year  to  be  devoted  exclusively  to  special  mission- 
ary training. 


THE  DISCUSSION 

Professor  Capen. — There  are  really  four  questions  that  enter  in- 
to this  discussion  of  a fourth  year.  First,  what  studies  additional  to 
those  included  in  the  standard  curriculum,  are  needed  by  would-be 
missionaries?  Second,  what  studies  can  be  reduced  in  order  to  make 
place  for  these?  Third,  can  this  special  preparation  be  secured  within 
the  three  years  of  the  standard  course?  Fourth,  can  the  seminaries 
furnish  all  this  preparation? 

First,  with  reference  to  the  additional  courses  that  should  be  pro- 
vided for  prospective  missionaries,  I would  venture  the  opinion  that 
these  men  and  women  need  instruction  in  certain  phases  of  social 
service,  preparatory  work  in  Phonetics  and  the  Science  of  Language, 
and  training  which  will  prepare  them  personally  to  appreciate  and 
interpret  the  history,  social  customs,  and  religious  beliefs  of  the  peo- 
pies  among  whom  they  are  to  live.  They  need  to  know  something  of 
the  science  and  art  of  Education,  and  of  the  principles  and  methods  of 
missionary  work,  studied  historically  and  comparatively  in  the  light 
of  their  results. 

Second,  there  is  very  little  in  the  standard  curriculum  which  is 
not  needed  by  the  prospective  missionary.  He  needs  a broader  and 
deeper  training  in  fundamental  studies  than  does  one  who  remains  at 
home.  If  it  were  generally  agreed  that  such  subjects  as  Greek  and 
Hebrew  should  no  longer  be  demanded  from  the  average  missionary 
candidate,  it  would  still  be  necessary  to  have  him  devote  the  time  thus 
saved  to  studies  which  are  being  added  to  the  standard  curriculum  as 
essential  elements  in  the  new  preparation  for  the  home  pastorate. 

40 


Third,  can  missionary  candidates  be  adequately  trained  in  the 
usual  three  years  of  theological  training?  Perhaps  some  can ; but  most 
can  not.  In  the  majority  of  cases,  the  introduction  of  technical  train- 
ing will  have  one  of  two  results:  it  will  be  done  in  so  superficial  a 
fashion  as  to  be  of  little  value;  or  it  will  make  impossible  adequate 
work  in  the  important  fundamental  studies.  This  danger  comes  out 
clearly  in  the  study  of  suggested  three  year  courses  for  ordained  mis- 
sionaries. There  is  abundant  room  for  a full  year  of  accurate,  scien- 
tific, highly  specialized  missionary  training  with  the  specific  mission 
field  constantly  in  the  candidate’s  mind.  It  has  been  suggested  that 
such  specialized  training  might  be  provided  in  connection  with  the 
union  language  schools  which  are  springing  up  on  the  mission  fields. 
But,  in  that  case,  it  would  be  almost  inevitable  that  the  taking  of  lec- 
tures in  English  and  the  study  of  English  books  would  prevent  suffi- 
cient use  of  the  vernacular  during  the  critical  first  year  of  language 
study.  The  student  would  continue  to  think  in  his  own  tongue  rather 
than  in  that  of  his  adopted  country,  and  this  would  destroy  or  greatly 
reduce  the  efficiency  of  the  language  school  as  such.  This  considera- 
tion alone  would  indicate  that  most  of  this  specialized  training  should 
be  provided  at  home. 

Fourth,  most  theological  seminaries  cannot  provide  this  training 
because  of  the  limited  number  of  missionary  candidates  among  their 
students  for  any  particular  field ; the  lack  of  sufficient  endowment ; and 
the  lack  of  enough  specialists.  Some  of  them  will  be  able  to  provide 
part  of  this  preparation;  perhaps,  a very  few,  all.  Institutions  are 
being  developed  for  meeting  the  specific  need  of  a highly  specialized 
graduate  year.  In  this  way  and  through  some  form  of  co-operative 
action  between  the  institutions  of  different  sections  and  denominations, 
adequate  facilities  can  be  provided. 

THE  GENERAL  DISCUSSION  OF  THE  LAST  THREE 

THEMES. 

President  Schultze. — I want  to  put  in  a plea  for  the  approval  of 
the  study  of  Hebrew  as  a valuable  asset  in  missionary  preparation. 
The  Moravian  Theological  Seminary  is  one  of  the  smaller  Divinity 
Schools  which  prepare  missionaries  for  service  in  foreign  lands,  as 
well  as  ministers  for  the  home  churches.  Yet  the  Moravian  Church 
or  Unitas  Fratrum  was  the  first  Protestant  or  evangelical  Church  to 
send  forth  missionaries  to  the  heathen,  when,  in  1732,  D.  Nitschmann 
and  Leonard  Dober  went  to  St.  Thomas.  She  has  ever  since  con- 
tinued to  do  missionary  pioneering  work  and  her  experience  is  entitled 
to  receive  consideration. 

One  of  the  first  two  missionaries,  Leonard  Dober,  though  simply 
a p>otter  by  trade,  could  read  his  Old  Testament  in  Hebrew.  In  1738 
he  began  a mission  work  among  the  Jews  of  Amsterdam,  in  Holland, 
as  the  first  Christian  missionary  of  modern  times  to  preach  the  Gospel 
to  Israel.  Although,  at  present,  the  Moravians  have  no  special  work 
among  the  Jews,  we  consider  the  study  of  Hebrew  important  for  at 
least  the  leading  men  in  the  different  mission  fields. 

41 


Our  theological  students  begin  Hebrew  in  their  sophomore  year 
at  college.  It  is  not  so  difficult  a language  to  learn  as  some  claim  who 
know  only  enough  of  it  to  give  students  the  advice  to  forget  their 
Hebrew,  because  they  themselves  have  so  little  to  forget.  When 
rightly  taught  and  studied,  there  is  much  joy  and  benefit  in  the  study 
of  Hebrew.  I testify  from  an  experience  of  fifty  years  in  teaching 
Hebrew. 

The  knowledge  of  Hebrew  is  directly  necessary  for  all  mission 
work  among  the  Jews ; it  is  almost  indispensable  for  missionary  work 
among  the  Mohammedans,  and  as  a preparation  for  the  study  of 
Arabic.  We  find,  furthermore,  that  the  knowledge  of  the  primitive 
forms  and  constructions  of  Hebrew  is  very  helpful  for  the  acquiring 
of  agglutinative  and  Turanian  languages,  such  as  the  Eskimo,  the 
Bantu  and  Kaffir,  or  even  the  Mongolian  languages.  While  we  recog- 
nize the  fact  that  the  language  of  a people  can  best  be  learned  by  being 
in  their  country  and  learning  it  from  them,  it  is  necessary  to  enlarge 
the  faculty  for  acquiring  that  language,  especially  among  the  uncivil- 
ized nations.  We  teach  our  own  candidates  for  the  mission  in  Alaska 
the  elements  of  Eskimo,  and  the  candidates  for  Nicaragua  to  read 
Spanish. 

As  Moravian  mission  fields,  not  by  choice  but  by  divine  over- 
ruling, are  largely  still  among  uncivilized  races,  we  find  it  desirable 
also  to  give  to  our  mission  candidates  some  practical  and  professional 
training  in  surgery  and  medicine,  in  carpentering  and  general  mechan- 
ical skill.  If  a choice  must  be  made,  they  can  rather  get  along  with 
less  knowledge  of  Philosophy,  Psychology  and  Economics  than  without 
this  practical  knowledge. 

Principal  Smyth. — Our  discussion  has  made  evident  two  or  three 
facts  of  primary  significance : 

First:  The  fundamental  difficulty  is  with  the  men  rather  than 

with  their  training;  it  is  the  same  problem  which  confronts  us  in  the 
work  at  home.  We  have  been  told  that  the  missionary  must  be  a 
man  with  “iron  in  his  constitution,”  a leader  of  men,  a teacher,  with 
the  faculty  of  training  others  to  teach,  and  so  on.  Yes,  but  how  are  we 
to  secure  these  men  ? We  are  not  getting  them  for  the  home  work. 

Again,  the  difficulty  of  devising  a standard  course  is  enhanced  by 
the  immense  differences  in  educational  attainment  of  the  students 
sent  to  our  theological  seminaries.  It  would  be  comparatively  easy  to 
devise  a curriculum  for  university  graduates,  but  we  have  candidates 
with  every  variety  of  attainment,  from  the  distinguished  university 
graduate  to  the  young  fellow  who  has  only  left  the  office  or  the  counter 
a few  months  previously.  We  seem  to  have  been  largely  discussing 
ideals — ideal  candidates  and  an  ideal  course,  which  was  possibly 
inevitable  and  by  no  means  without  profit.  We  must  not  overlook, 
however,  the  practical  difficulties  that  confront  us  in  our  theological 
schools. 

Further,  we  should  frankly  recognize  the  limitations  imposed  by 
questions  of  time  and  opportunity.  Our  missionaries  can  not  know 
everything.  There  is  danger  of  overloading  the  course  at  the  expense 

42 


of  thoroughness ; the  most  we  can  hope  for  is  a good  general  knowl- 
edge of  the  more  vital  branches  of  learning,  with  specialization  in 
studies  more  peculiarly  important  to  the  missionary. 

But  it  should  be  our  chief  aim  to  turn  out  men  trained  to  think, 
who  are  yet  preachers  with  conviction.  I am  not  solicitous  about  the 
particular  brand  of  theology.  The  history  of  religious  revivals  shows 
this  to  be  largely  immaterial ; but  the  supremely  vital,  the  immensely 
difficult  task  of  the  theological  professor  of  to-day  is  to  produce 
preachers  with  conviction ; to  teach  thoughtful  young  men  to  re-adjust 
their  theological  preconceptions,  and  meet  the  problems  raised  by  the 
modern  study  of  Comparative  Religion,  while  still  retaining  a firm 
belief  in  the  uniqueness  and  pre-eminence  of  Christianity  and  the  all- 
sufficiency  of  the  Gospel  to  meet  the  world’s  needs. 

President  Wardle. — In  considering  the  number  of  years  neces- 
sary for  adequate  missionary  training,  we  should  not  forget  the  sum- 
mer school  opportunity.  There  seems  to  be  a consensus  of  opinion 
that  three  years  of  theological  training  afford  insufficient  time.  But 
the  wise  use  of  two  long  summer  vacations  would  readily  afford  the 
equivalent  of  another  year.  Once  it  was  thought  that  the  long  vaca- 
tion was  needed  for  rest,  but  now  all  agree  that  four  months  of  relaxa- 
tion from  study  is  unnecessary  and  often  detrimental.  The  wise  use 
of  summer  time  would  also  be  a saving  in  the  expense  of  preparation. 
A first-rate  summer  school  might  be  a co-operative  affair  between 
several  seminaries.  It  would  attract  many  pastors,  especially,  if  held 
at  well-equipped  universities  or  training  schools.  Very  often  pastors 
under  appointment  for  foreign  service  could  spend  four  summer 
months  in  special  preparation  for  their  work  before  sailing,  when  a 
school  year  of  study  would  be  beyond  their  reach. 

Professor  Soper. — I do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  opposing  a 
fourth  seminary  year,  and  yet  I should  like  to  state  several  facts  which 
render  a fourth  year  less  necessary  now  than  it  was  under  conditions 
existing  in  our  seminaries  ten  or  twelve  years  ago.  Reviewing  the 
eight  items  which  Dr.  Barton  mentioned,  I notice  that  all  except  the 
last  are  provided  for  now  in  seminaries.  Since  I was  a theological 
student,  our  strongest  seminaries  have  made  generous  provision  for 
Pedagogy,  Sociology,  and  Comparative  Religion,  three  very  important 
departments  as  regards  missionary  preparation. 

The  elective  system  has,  likewise,  been  widely  extended.  Nearly  all 
theological  students  have  the  opportunity  to  specialize  to  some  extent. 
At  Drew,  some  thirty-five  semester  hours  have  been  added  to  the  cur- 
riculum during  the  past  five  years.  A judicious  use  of  electives  may 
enable  a student  to  secure  the  bulk  of  the  training  he  needs  within  the 
prescribed  three  years. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  a candidate  might  well  make  a thorough 
study  of  the  field  to  which  he  is  about  to  go  during  a possible  fourth 
year.  This  is  by  no  means  essential  to  his  success.  Indeed,  such  a 
study  is  a part  of  the  life-work  of  a missionary,  and  must  be  carried 
out  on  the  field  itself. 


43 


Professor  Sailer. — When  I was  a child  my  imagination  was  much 
stirred  by  stories  of  Russian  travelers  pursued  by  wolves,  who  found 
it  necessary  to  throw  out  some  of  their  own  children  to  the  wolves 
in  order  to  delay  the  fierce  animals  and  lighten  the  sleigh.  We  are, 
to-day,  in  much  the  same  situation  with  the  curriculum.  It  has  be- 
come top-heavy,  and,  in  the  interests  of  the  sleigh  itself,  we  must 
sacrifice  something,  agonizing  though  the  process  may  be. 

With  regard  to  Hebrew,  I may  say  that  I made  it  a main  study 
in  a three  years’  seminary  course,  took  a higher  degree  in  Semitic 
languages,  and  taught  Hebrew  for  six  years.  It  seems  to  me  that  the 
little  the  average  theological  student  learns  of  it  is  of  much  less  value 
than  many  other  subjects  might  be  to  him.  The  chief  objection  is 
that  it  takes  so  much  time  to  gain  anything  like  mastery.  I would 
gladly  exchange  what  I used  to  know  of  Hebrew  for  a knowledge  of 
almost  any  other  of  the  subjects  on  Dr.  Barton’s  list. 

In  this  day  of  specialization,  it  is  impossible  for  any  one  mis- 
sionary to  be  up  in  all  the  subjects  needed.  The  unit  should  be  the 
group  and  not  the  individual  missionary.  We  need  a few  missionaries 
with  a good  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  but  only  a few.  It  is,  in  my  opin- 
ion, a mistake  to  require  it  from  the  average  missionary. 

Professor  Robinson. — Like  Professor  Sailer,  I was  once  a 
teacher  of  Hebrew.  By  the  re-adjustment  of  courses,  I was  led  to 
become  a teacher  of  the  English  Bible.  I find  my  exegetical  experi- 
ence of  the  greatest  value  in  my  present  work.  From  another  angle 
also,  I would  insist  on  the  continuing  importance  of  language  study. 
The  great  outstanding  defect  of  foreign  missionary  work  to-day  is 
the  inability  of  the  missionaries  to  use  a vernacular.  I call  to  witness 
the  fifth  volume  of  the  Reports  of  the  World  Missionary  Conference. 
Too  many  missionaries  are  talking  to  their  congregations  through  in- 
terpreters. The  cure  is  not  a fresh  avoidance  of  linguistic  study,  but 
a more  scientific  procedure. 

Professor  Macdonald. — The  fundamental  argument  against  the 
dropping  of  Hebrew  as  a required  study  for  the  missionary  is  that 
there  is  no  adequate  translation  of  the  Old  Testament.  None  of  the 
revised  versions  is  remotely  satisfactory.  All  have  startling  blunders 
even  in  simple  historical  passages.  On  the  basis  of  twenty  years’ 
teaching  of  Hebrew,  I can  say,  with  confidence,  that  a single  year  of 
Hebrew  will  demonstrate  this  to  any  attentive  student.  Therefore, 
anyone  who  wishes  to  use  the  Old  Testament  must  be  in  a position  to 
control  the  English  version  by  means  of  the  Hebrew  original.  Further, 
he  need  not  be  afraid  of  the  amount  of  work  required  to  put  him  in  a 
position  to  do  that. 

It  is  especially  advantageous  for  the  missionary  to  have  studied 
Hebrew.  He  must  learn  the  language  of  his  field.  But  first  he  must 
know  how  to  learn  a language.  Very  many  go  through  our  schools  and 
colleges  and  spend  time  over  Latin  and  Greek  and  modem  languages, 
but  do  not  learn  them.  They  are  not  taught  how  to  study  them,  and 
they  are  left  with  the  impression  that  they  can  not  master  languages. 

44 


I have  had  many  students  who,  if  it  had  been  left  to  their  choice,  would 
not  have  taken  Hebrew.  They  had  classified  themselves,  finally,  as 
non-linguistic.  Yet  under  the  favorable  conditions  and  in  the  small 
classes  of  a theological  seminary,  they  discovered  how  to  learn  a lan- 
guage and,  in  proportion  to  the  time  they  put  on  it,  they  mastered 
Hebrew. 

To  the  brilliant  progress  in  Turkish  of  one  of  these.  Dr.  Barton 
has  already  made  reference.  He  came  to  the  seminary  convinced  by 
school  and  college  experience  that  language  was  not  his  forte;  yet  he 
was  first  in  Hebrew  in  his  year  and  thereafter  did  excellent  work  in 
Arabic.  It  is  true  that  some  men — but  they  are  few — simply  can  not 
learn  a language.  That  they  have  not  done  so  at  school  and  college 
is,  in  itself,  no  evidence ; they  may  belong  to  the  class  above.  But  it  is 
eminently  in  the  interests  of  the  Mission  Boards,  that  they  should  be 
thoroughly  tried  out.  No  Foreign  Mission  Board  wants  a man  who  is 
devoid  of  linguistic  sense.  And  that  trying-out  can  be  done  by  the 
Hebrew  course  of  a theological  seminary. 

Much  has  been  said  on  the  value  of  courses  for  the  study  of  the 
English  Bible.  Such  study  is  admirable  and  necessary,  but  who  shall 
conduct  the  courses?  Here  my  first  point  comes  again  into  play.  No 
one  can  teach  even  the  English  Old  Testament  with  safety,  unless  he 
can  control  his  English  version  by  means  of  the  Hebrew  original. 
Otherwise,  he  is  not  guiding  in  the  study  of  the  Old  Testament,  but 
is  carrying  on  an  English  Literature  course  in  the  King  James  version, 
or  the  revised  edition.  But  where  are  these  teachers  to  come  from? 
Once  let  the  idea  get  abroad  that  Hebrew  is  not  necessary  for  the  Old 
Testament  student  and  the  number  of  students  taking  Hebrew  will 
at  once  dwindle.  At  present,  the  only  practical  method  of  demon- 
strating to  a student  the  value  of  Hebrew  is  to  teach  him  Hebrew, 
and  thus  to  show  him  how  Hebrew  can  change  the  Old  Testament 
for  him.  But  if  he  does  not  study  Hebrew,  he  will  cling  to  the  vener- 
able errors  of  our  translations  and  uphold  their  inerrancy.  Thus,  our 
supply  of  solidly  based  teachers  of  even  the  English  Bible  will  be 
cut  off. 

President  White. — I am  inclined  to  favor  a fourth  year  of  spe- 
cial training  for  the  missionary  candidate.  Already  there  is  too  much 
in  the  three  years’  theological  curriculum  for  the  average  man  to  do 
as  well  as  it  should  be  done,  and  more  is  coming  all  the  time.  And 
this,  to  say  nothing  of  the  woeful  absence  of  knowledge  of  the  Bible 
itself  with  which  many  a student  begins  his  theological  course.  The 
equivalent  of  a full  year’s  time  should  be  involved  in  the  theological 
course  in  the  direction  of  mastery  of  the  Bible.  The  only  alternative 
for  this  fourth  year  which  I see,  is  to  catch  the  student  younger  and 
give  him  beforehand  the  equivalent  of  one  or  two  years’  specialized 
preparation  before  he  reaches  the  seminary.  If  I had  my  own  way, 
the  student,  who  comes  out  of  the  college  of  to-day,  would  have  five 
years  instead  of  three.  There  is  much  to  commend  in  the  suggestion 
of  Dr.  Sailer  that  we  seek  to  dovetail  the  college  work  with  the 
seminary  work. 


45 


President  Evans. — The  financing  of  a fourth  year  is  a serious 
problem  for  the  average  school  of  theology.  It  means  additional  pro- 
fessors for  very  few  students  in  any  one  year,  possibly  no  more  than 
two  or  three.  Could  not  the  financial  problem,  however,  be  solved  at 
minimum  expense  to  Mission  Boards  through  fellowships,  by  means 
of  which  a theological  school  could  send  such  fourth-year  students  to 
a university,  either  in  America,  or  Europe,  or  Asia,  to  secure  the 
special  training  it  itself  does  not  have  the  facilities  to  give  ? 

Principal  Hill. — The  regular  three  years’  course  will  have  to  be 
the  standard  preparation  for  the  missionary  no  less  than  for  the  pastor 
at  home.  Men  are  quite  unwilling  to  delay  for  another  year,  after 
many  years  of  studying.  They  long  to  get  quickly  into  their  work. 
Protracted  years  in  scholastic  life  tend  to  cool  the  zest  for  the  evan- 
gelistic portion  of  a pastor’s  or  missionary’s  life.  It  might  be  good 
policy  to  send  candidates  out  after  three  years  of  study  into  personal 
touch  with  the  people  for  whom  their  life  is  to  be  given,  to  steady 
their  purpose.  The  learning  of  the  language  and  the  elementary 
preaching  would  not  be  affected  by  lack  of  extra  training.  Having 
made  a short  stay,  during  which  the  language  has  been  mastered,  they 
could  come  back  for  the  extra  year.  By  that  time,  they  would  know 
definitely  the  work  they  were  to  do,  which  they  seldom  do  at  the  close 
of  their  college  course.  The  year  then  would  meet  a sense  of  need. 

Professor  Rowe. — Men  who  prepare  to  specialize  in  the  foreign 
field  are  often  deeply  disappointed.  They  are  given  something  else 
to  do.  The  fourth  seminary  year  should  come  during  the  first  fur- 
lough period.  Every  man  will  then  know  his  powers  and  his  limita- 
tions, and  be  able  to  make  a wise  use  of  his  time.  Let  us  further  plan 
to  bring  missionaries  willing  to  study  home,  for  a year  of  furlough 
study  once  every  five  years.  By  this  method,  we  would  develop  great 
missionaries. 

The  Chairman. — We  must  impress  upon  our  Findings  Commit- 
tee, through  which  this  Conference  will  speak  with  an  authority  pre- 
viously without  parallel,  that  it  must  not  commit  our  theological  schools 
to  any  relinquishment  of  present  standards  in  the  preparation  of  men 
for  the  ministry  at  home.  There  is  no  recognized  profession,  except 
the  ministry,  that  does  not  require  more  professional  training  to-day 
than  was  required  half  or  a quarter  of  a century  ago. 

Once  a theological  course  invariably  implied  three  strong  years 
in  addition  to  full  collegiate  training.  Since  then,  we  have  added  many 
studies  to  the  standard  theological  course,  and  have  enlarged  those 
which  formerly  were  looked  upon  as  alone  essential.  The  result  is  a 
more  chaotic  condition  than  is  to  be  found  in  the  training  schools  of 
any  other  profession.  On  the  whole,  I fear,  that  in  many  respects,  the 
training  of  the  ministry  is  less  adapted  to  the  sterner  and  wider  de- 
mands of  our  day  than  it  was,  relatively,  to  the  situation  of  the  Church 
fifty  years  ago. 

In  medicine,  they  are  talking  about  a fourth  year  and  a fifth  year. 
They  will  demand  all  the  years  that  are  essential  to  professional  effi- 

46 


ciency.  But  the  Church  is  permitting  its  candidates  for  ministerial 
leadership  to  shorten  or  minimize  their  preparation.  Let  us  demand 
from  the  candidate  whatever  will  make  him  a fit  representative  of  the 
Church,  at  home  or  abroad.  The  would-be  missionary  is  a specialist. 
That  fact  must  not  lessen  his  time  of  preparation,  but  rather  lengthen 
it.  Any  other  conclusion  will  rather  disastrously  react  upon  the  train- 
ing of  the  pastor  for  the  home  field. 


47 


THE  FINDINGS  OF  THE  CONFERENCE 

This  Conference  of  the  Board  of  Missionary  Prepara- 
tion with  representatives  of  Theological  Institutions  and 
Foreign  Mission  Boards  of  North  America,  expresses  the 
following  judgment  respecting  the  educational  preparation 
of  the  ordained  missionary  for  service  on  the  foreign  mission 
field. 

I.  Studies  to  be  Pursued  by  the  Missionary  Candidate. 

The  student  preparing  for  work  as  an  ordained  mission- 
ary should  take  a full  collegiate  and  theological  course,  the 
latter  including  courses  in  special  preparation  for  foreign 
missionary  service,  or  being  supplemented  by  such  studies. 
His  collegiate  and  subsequent  courses  should  include  the  fol- 
lowing studies: 

Studies  Ordinarily  Pursued  in  College. 

A modern  language,  in  addition  to  the  study  of  his  mother  tongue. 
Greek. 

General  psychology. 

Educational  psychology,  or  the  principles  of  education. 

History  of  philosophy. 

General  history,  or  the  history  of  civilization. 

Biblical  history  and  literature. 

Social  and  religious  survey  of  the  world. 

Economics. 

Human  society  and  the  laws  of  its  organization. 

Some  physical  and  biological  science. 

The  above  studies  should  ordinarily  be  pursued  in  college,  but,  failing  this, 
should  be  taken  later. 

Studies  Ordinarily  Pursued  in  Professional  Schools. 

The  historical  and  interpretative  study  of  the  Bible,  preferably  includ- 
ing the  study  of  the  original  languages. 

Church  history,  especially  of  early  Christianity  in  relation  to  other 
religions. 

Systematic  theology. 

Apologetics. 

The  effective  presentation  of  the  Christian  message  (missionary 
homiletics). 

The  historical  and  comparative  study  of  church  organization  and 
activity  (church  polity). 

The  history,  psychology,  and  philosophy  of  religion. 

Principles  of  religious  education. 

The  history  of  missions  especially  the  modem  period,  accompanied 
by  readings  in  the  biographies  of  missionaries. 

48 


Principles  and  methods  of  Christian  missions. 

Phonetics,  and  the  scientific  method  of  language  study. 

The  above  studies  should  be  taken  in  a theological  seminary,  in  a special 
missionary  training  school,  or  in  a university.  They  should  be  accompanied 
by  practical  Christian  work  under  competent  guidance,  and  be  pursued  under 
influences  adapted  to  develop  the  Christian  life. 

Studies  Usually  Taken  on  the  Field. 

The  language  of  the  missionary’s  field. 

Its  history  and  literature,  economic  and  social  conditions. 

To  all  the  above  it  is  desirable  to  add,  in  most  cases, 

Hygiene. 

Sanitation. 

Business  methods. 

First  aid  to  the  injured. 

Music. 

2.  The  Length  of  the  Course. 

The  amount  and  importance  of  work  to  be  done  in  the 
field  of  special  missionary  preparation  is  so  great,  that  no 
student  ought  to  sacrifice  the  thoroughness  and  completeness 
of  his  theological  curriculum  by  attempting  to  cover  both  the 
regular  and  the  special  studies  in  three  annual  sessions  of  the 
ordinary  length.  With  a sufficient  faculty  and  with  a school 
year  of  sufficient  length  the  curriculum  might  be  so  arranged 
as  to  make  the  special  missionary  preparation  an  organic  part 
of  the  curriculum. 

Such  a course  might,  for  example,  include  the  following 
studies : 

Old  Testament,  192  hours. 

New  Testament,  192  hours. 

Church  History,  192  hours. 

Systematic  Theology,  192  hours. 

Missionary  Homiletics,  96  hours. 

Religious  Education,  96  hours. 

History  of  Missions,  96  hours. 

Apologetics,  48  hours. 

Church  Polity,  48  hours. 

Principles  and  Methods  of  Missions,  48  hours. 

Such  a curriculum  can  be  covered  in  twenty-seven  or 
twenty-eight  months,  that  is,  in  three  years  of  nine  months, 
or  in  four  years  of  seven  months.  But  it  is  obvious  that  no 
school  should  undertake  thus  to  enlarge  the  curriculum  un- 

49 


less  it  can  both  raise  the  new  subjects  to  the  level  of  the  old, 
and  at  the  same  time,  avoid  sacrificing  the  old  subjects.  Two 
summer  sessions  of  a school  of  high  scholastic  standards  and 
spiritual  atmosphere,  which  might  be  co-operatively  con- 
ducted by  all  the  institutions  in  a given  region  at  an  institu- 
tion conveniently  located  and  well  equipped,  might  wisely 
supplement  the  three  years’  course  where  no  adequate  train- 
ing or  special  missionary  courses  are  provided.  Such  a 
method  would  be  more  effective  and  far  more  economical 
than  the  lengthening  of  the  course  in  all  our  theological 
schools. 

For  the  student  who  gives  a fourth  year  to  special  prep- 
aration, it  will  be  natural  to  continue  at  his  own  theologi- 
cal seminary,  if  it  provides  opportunities  which  are  adequate 
in  amount  and  scholarly  quality.  Otherwise,  he  will  be  com- 
pelled to  seek  out  another  seminary  which  does  offer  these 
opportunities,  or  proceed  to  one  of  the  recently  founded 
schools  for  missionary  training,  or  to  some  university  centre 
offering  him  his  desired  advantages. 

3.  Advising  and  Aiding  the  Candidate. 

Without  involving  the  Mission  Board  in  expense  or  in 
definite  acceptance  of  a candidate,  it  is  our  conviction  that, 
whenever  possible,  a candidate  should  be  brought  under  the 
consideration  of  his  Board  sufficiently  early  to  enable  the 
Candidate  Secretary  and  Board  or  such  other  ecclesiastical 
body  as  may  be  involved  to  aid  in  the  direction  of  his 
preparation. 

If  in  the  judgment  of  a Board,  after  the  candidate  has 
been  accepted,  special  preparation,  in  addition  to  that  pro- 
vided by  the  college  and  theological  seminary,  is  desirable 
for  a candidate,  in  order  to  equip  him  the  better  for  the 
course  to  which  he  has  been  assigned,  we  believe  it  to  be  a 
proper  and  economical  use  of  the  Church’s  funds  for  the 
expenses  of  such  special  preparation  to  be  provided  on  the 
fellowship  basis. 


50 


4.  Some  Courses  to  be  Pursued  by  Candidates  for  the 

Home  Ministry. 

In  the  conviction  that  the  responsibility  of  the  missionary 
enterprise  rests  equally  upon  those  who  stay  at  home  and 
those  who  go  to  the  foreign  field,  we  recommend  that  stu- 
dents looking  forward  to  work  in  the  home  field  should, 
as  far  as  practicable,  include  the  following  studies  in  their 
courses  of  training: 

The  history,  psychology  and  philosophy  of  religion,  including 
a clear  presentation  of  the  character  and  fruitage  of  each  religion 
at  the  present  day. 

History,  principles  and  methods  of  Christian  missions,  includ- 
ing the  basis  of  their  claim  upon  the  home  church. 

Home  organizations,  and  administration  of  the  student’s  de- 
nominational Board  and  of  other  missionary  agencies. 

The  presentation  of  missions,  and  development  of  missionary 
spirit  within  the  parish. 

The  study  of  missionary  movements,  biography  and  work  in 
specific  fields. 

To  these  the  student  should  add  private  reading  in  Mis- 
sionary Biography. 

5.  The  Spirit  and  Method  Required  in  Theological 

Education. 

Under  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  Christian  peo- 
ple have  come  in  these  recent  years  more  or  less  consciously 
to  see  that  Christianity  is  in  its  very  essence  missionary ; and 
the  changes  in  the  curricula  of  our  theological  seminaries  in 
the  direction  of  more  adequate  preparation  for  missionary 
service  have,  therefore,  meant  in  large  part,  simply  prepara- 
tion for  a more  consistent  and  thorough-going  presentation 
of  Christianity  itself.  The  new  emphases  and  subjects  have 
been  demanded  just  because  there  could  be  no  effective  set- 
ting forth  of  the  Christian  message  and  life  without  them. 
The  spirit  and  method  needed  are  themselves  suggested,  thus, 
by  the  new  emphases  and  the  new  subjects.  And  for  final 
results  the  right  spirit  and  method  may  mean  more  than  the 
exact  content  of  the  course  of  study. 

51 


As  to  spirit,  then,  we  are  really  asking  in  the  Christian 
missionary  the  same  Christlike  spirit  that  should  character- 
ize every  Christian  minister,  every  theological  teacher,  and 
indeed  every  Christian  disciple.  The  Christian  missionary 
needs  to  have  drunk  so  deep  of  the  spirit  of  Christ  that  he 
may  incarnate  the  spirit  of  brotherhood,  of  unwearied  sym- 
pathy, of  the  ability  to  put  himself  with  thought  and  imagina- 
tion at  the  point  of  view  of  the  man  he  would  help,  so  as  to 
appreciate  the  best  in  him,  and  to  respond  to  his  deepest  need. 
He  must  have  not  less  the  sacrificial  spirit  that  enables  him 
unhesitatingly,  sternly  to  subordinate  all  the  lesser  goods  to 
the  supreme  goal  of  the  Kingdom.  And,  as  the  prime  con- 
dition of  the  successful  performance  of  his  task,  he  requires 
such  an  actual,  outgoing,  invincible  love  for  men  as  compels 
him  to  share  with  other  men  the  best  which  Christ  has 
brought  to  him.  He  needs,  up  to  the  full  measure  of  his 
ability,  a contagious  personality,  convictions  that  breed  con- 
viction, character-begetting  power.  And  all  this  holds  not 
less  for  theological  teachers  and  for  all  those  who  are  to  go 
into  the  home  field.  The  spirit  of  the  theological  seminary 
itself  should  be  such  as  naturally  to  call  out  such  men. 

As  to  method,  the  theological  seminary  needs  the  simple 
application  of  those  methods  that  an  honest,  adequate  and 
effective  presentation  of  Christianity  in  the  foreign  field  de- 
mands. The  method,  therefore,  must  be  characterized  by 
the  scientific  spirit — so  essentially  akin  to  our  Lord’s  own 
demand  for  utter  inner  integrity  of  spirit — by  the  determin- 
ation to  see  straight,  to  report  exactly,  to  give  an  absolutely 
honest  reaction  upon  the  situation  in  which  one  is  placed. 
(Even  minor  adjustments  in  curricula  go  back  to  this.)  The 
method  must  be  characterized  secondly  by  the  historical  and 
comparative  spirit,  that  can  trace  truth  in  its  development, 
that  can  see  that  Church  History  is  past  Missions,  and  can 
learn  from  all  the  past : and  that  has  won  the  power  to  enter 
intelligently  and  sympathetically  into  the  life  of  other 


52 


churches,  races,  civilizations  and  religions.  The  method 
needs,  too,  the  concrete,  accurate,  psychological  approach, 
that  will  express  itself  in  the  whole  field  of  religious  educa- 
tion and  in  the  practical  presentation  of  the  Christian  mes- 
sage, and  will  afifect  the  spirit  of  all  other  theological  instruc- 
tion. The  theological  seminary,  too,  will  not  be  true  even  to 
the  spirit  of  religion  if  it  does  not  strive  to  see  life  steadily, 
to  see  it  whole,  to  see  it  in  its  ultimate  meanings,  and  so  to 
bring  to  its  subjects  the  philosophic  mind.  Nor  can  it  be 
true  to  the  deepest  moral  characteristic  of  our  age — the  social 
consciousness — without  earnestly  trying  to  apply  to  the  en- 
tire social  life  of  our  time  at  home  and  abroad  the  standards 
and  ideals  of  our  Lord.  If  these  methods  truly  prevail,  the 
theological  seminary  can  hardly  fail  to  give  to  its  students 
what  is  most  important  for  their  future  growth, — points  of 
view,  introduction  to  the  sources,  enduring  impetus,  and 
right  methods  of  work. 


S3 


THE  ROLL  OF  THE  CONFERENCE 

Thirty-seven  theological  institutions  were  represented  as 
follows : 

THE  CO-OPERATING  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGES  AFFILIATED  WITH 
McGILL  UNIVERSITY, 

Rev.  John  Scrimger,  D.D.,  Dean. 

CONGREGATIONAL  COLLEGE  OF  CANADA,  Montreal, 

Rev.  Edward  M.  Hill,  D.D.,  Principal. 

DIOSCESAN  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGE,  Montreal, 

Rev.  Elson  I.  Rexford,  LL.D.,  Principal. 

PRESBYTERIAN  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGE,  Montreal, 

Rev.  John  Scrimger,  D.D.,  Principal. 

WESLEYAN  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGE,  Montreal, 

Rev.  James  Smyth,  LL.D.,  Principal 

WYCLIFFE  COLLEGE,  Toronto, 

Rev.  T.  R.  O’Meara,  D.D.,  Principal. 

HARTFORD  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Hartford,  Conn., 

Rev.  W.  Douglas  Mackenzie,  D.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Professor  M.  W.  Jacobus,  D.D.,  Dean. 

Professor  Duncan  B.  Macdonald,  Ph.D. 

THE  YALE  SCHOOL  OF  RELIGION,  New  Haven,  Conn., 

Rev.  Professor  Harlan  P.  Beach,  D.D. 

THE  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY  OF  EMORY  UNIVERSITY  OF  THE 
METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH,  SOUTH,  Atlanta,  Ga., 

Rev.  Plato  T.  Durham,  D.D.,  Dean. 

CHICAGO  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Chicago,  III, 

Professor  Ernest  D.  Burton,  D.D.,  Representative. 

DIVINITY  SCHOOL  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO,  Chicago,  III, 
Professor  Ernest  D.  Burton,  D.D. 

GARRETT  BIBLICAL  INSTITUTE,  Evanston,  III, 

Rev.  Professor  W.  D.  Schermerhorn,  Ph.D. 

McCORMICK  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Chicago,  III, 

Rev.  Professor  George  L.  Robinson,  Ph.D. 

WESTMINSTER  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Westminster,  Md., 

Rev.  Hugh  Latimer  Elderdice,  D.D.,  President. 

ANDOVER  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Cambridge,  Mass., 

Rev.  Professor  John  Winthrop  Platner,  D.D. 

BOSTON  UNIVERSITY  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY,  Boston,  Mass., 

Rev.  L.  J.  Birney,  D.D.,  Dean. 

EPISCOPAL  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Cambridge,  Mass., 

Rev.  Professor  Max  Kellner,  D.D. 

Rev.  Professor  Henry  Bradford  Washburn,  D.D. 

NEWTON  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTION,  Newton  Center,  Mass., 
Professor  Henry  K.  Rowe,  Ph.D. 

DREW  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Madison,  N.  J., 

Rev.  Professor  Edmund  D.  Soper,  D.D. 

THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  OF  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH, 
Princeton,  N.  J., 

Rev.  J.  Ross  Stevenson,  D.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Professor  Charles  R.  Erdman,  D.D. 

54 


THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  OF  THE  REFORMED  CHURCH  IN 
AMERICA,  New  Brunswick,  N.  J., 

Rev.  J.  Preston  Searle,  D.D.,  President 

ALFRED  UNIVERSITY  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Alfred,  N.  Y., 

Rev.  Professor  William  C.  Whitford,  D.D. 

COLGATE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Hamilton,  N.  Y., 

Rev.  William  H.  Allison,  D.D.,  Dean. 

GENERAL  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  OF  THE  PROTESTANT  EPIS- 
COPAL CHURCH,  New  York  City, 

Rev.  Wn-FORD  L.  Robbins,  D.D.,  Dean, 

Rev.  Professor  Francis  Branch  Blodgett,  D.D. 

ROCHESTER  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Rochester,  N.  Y., 

Rev.  Professor  Henry  B.  Robins,  Ph.D. 

UNION  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  New  York  City, 

Rev.  Francis  Brown,  D.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Professor  Robert  E.  Hume,  Ph.D. 

CENTRAL  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  OF  THE  REFORMED  CHURCH 
IN  THE  UNITED  STATES,  Dayton,  Ohio, 

Rev.  A.  D.  WoLFiNGER,  D.D. 

OBERLIN  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Oberlin,  Ohio, 

Rev.  Henry  Churchill  King,  LL.D.,  President. 

UNITED  PRESBYTERIAN  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Xenia,  Ohio, 
Rev.  Professor  M.  G.  Kyle,  D.D. 

W.  NAST  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Berea,  Ohio, 

Rev.  John  A.  Vollenweider. 

CROZER  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Chester,  Pa., 

Rev.  Milton  G.  Evans,  D.D.,  President. 

MORAVIAN  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Bethlehem,  Pa., 

Rev.  Augustus  Schultze,  D.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Professor  W.  N.  Schwarze,  D.D. 

PITTSBURGH  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Pittsburgh,  Pa., 

Rev.  Professor  W.  R.  Wilson,  D.D. 

THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  OF  THE  REFORMED  CHURCH  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES,  Lancaster,  Pa., 

Rev.  John  C.  Bowman,  D.D.,  President. 

THEOLOGICAL  DEPARTMENT  OF  TEMPLE  UNIVERSITY,  Philadel- 
phia, Pa., 

Rev.  W.  B.  Shumway,  D.D.,  Dean. 

BIBLICAL  DEPARTMENT  OF  VANDERBILT  UNIVERSITY, 

Rev.  W.  F.  Tillett,  D.D.,  Dean. 

Rev.  Professor  O.  E.  Brown,  D.D. 

THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  OF  THE  PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH,  Theological  Seminary,  Va., 

Rev.  Edmund  J.  Lee. 

XENIA  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY,  Xenia,  Ohio. 

Rev.  Professor  M.  G.  Kyle,  D.D. 

Five  institutions  interested  in  the  training  of  mission- 
aries were  represented  at  the  Conference  by  eight  delegates. 

BIBLE  TEACHERS’  TRAINING  SCHOOL,  New  York  City, 

Rev.  Wilbert  W.  White,  Ph.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Professor  Thomas  F.  Cummings. 

55 


CINCINNATI  MISSIONARY  TRAINING  SCHOOL,  Cincinnati,  Ohio, 

Miss  Addie  Grace  Wardle.  M.A.,  President. 

COLLEGE  OF  MISSIONS,  Indianapolis,  Ind. 

Professor  Harry  C.  Hurd,  Registrar. 

KENNEDY  SCHOOL  OF  MISSIONS,  Hartford,  Conn., 

Rev.  Professor  Edward  W.  Capen,  Ph.D.,  Secretary. 

TEACHERS’  COLLEGE  OF  COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY,  New  York  City, 
Professor  James  E.  Russell,  Ph.D.,  Dean. 

Professor  T.  H.  P.  Sailer,  Ph.D. 

Of  the  Foreign  Mission  Boards  and  co-operating  organi- 
zations represented  in  the  Foreign  Missions  Conference  of 
North  America  twenty-nine  were  represented  by  fifty-two 
delegates. 

AMERICAN  BOARD  OF  COMMISSIONERS  FOR  FOREIGN  MISSIONS, 
Rev.  James  L.  Barton,  D.D.,  Corresponding  Secretary. 

Rev.  Edward  Lincoln  Smith,  D.D.,  Corresponding  Secretary. 

WOMAN’S  BOARD  OF  MISSIONS  (CONGREGATIONAL), 

Miss  Helen  B.  Calder,  Secretary. 

AMERICAN  BAPTIST  FOREIGN  MISSION  SOCIETY, 

Rev.  Emory  W.  Hunt,  D.D.,  General  Secretary. 

Rev.  Fred  P.  Haggard,  D.D.,  Home  Secretary. 

FOREIGN  MISSION  BOARD,  SOUTHERN  BAPTIST  CONVENTION, 
Rev.  T.  B.  Ray,  D.D.,  Foreign  Secretary. 

CHRISTIAN  WOMEN’S  BOARD  OF  MISSIONS  (DISCIPLES), 

Rev.  S.  G.  Inman. 

THE  CANADIAN  CHURCH  MISSIONARY  SOCIETY, 

Rev.  Canon  T.  R.  O’Meara,  LL.D..  Secretary. 

DOMESTIC  AND  FOREIGN  MISSIONARY  SOCIETY  OF  THE  PROT- 
ESTANT EPISCOPAL  CHURCH  IN  THE  U.  S.  A., 

Rt.  Rev.  Arthur  S.  Lloyd,  D.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Arthur  M.  Sherman. 

AMERICAN  FRIENDS  BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS, 

Miss  Carolena  M.  Wood. 

Ross  A.  Hadley,  Assistant  Secretary. 

FOREIGN  MISSIONARY  ASSOCIATION  OF  FRIENDS  OF  PHILA- 
DELPHIA, 

Horace  E.  Coleman. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  OF  THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL  OF 
THE  EVANGELICAL  LUTHERAN  CHURCH  IN  N.  A., 

Rev.  George  Drach,  General  and  Candidate  Secretary. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  OF  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH, 

Rev.  Whj-lam  F.  Oldham,  D.D.,  Corresponding  Secretary. 

Rev.  Thomas  S.  Donohugh,  Candidate  Secretary. 

WOMAN’S  FOREIGN  MISSIONARY  SOCIETY  OF  THE  METHODIST 
EPISCOPAL  CHURCH, 

Mrs.  John  M.  Cornell,  Corresponding  Secretary,  New  York  Branch. 
Mrs.  Edward  S.  Ferry,  Acting  President,  New  York  Branch. 

Miss  Florence  Hooper,  General  Treasurer. 

Miss  Elizabeth  R.  Bender,  General  OflSce  Secretary. 

56 


Mrs.  J.  H.  Knowles,  Recording  Secretary,  New  York  Branch. 

Mrs.  W.  F.  Oldham. 

Mrs.  J.  Edgar  Leaycraft. 

Miss  W.  R.  Lewis. 

Mrs.  Dion  Wylie  Kennedy. 

MISSIONARY  SOCIETY  OF  THE  METHODIST  CHURCH,  Canada, 

Rev.  James  Endicott,  D.D.,  General  and  Candidate  Secretary. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  METHODIST  PROTESTANT 
CHURCH, 

Rev,  Fred  C.  Klein,  D.D.,  Corresponding  Secretary  and  Treasurer. 

SOCIETY  OF  UNITED  BRETHREN  FOR  PROPAGATING  THE  GOSPEL 
AMONG  THE  HEATHEN  (MORAVIAN  CHURCH), 

Rev.  W.  N.  ScHWARZE,  D.D. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  OF  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH 
IN  U.  S.  A., 

Robert  E.  Speer,  D.D.,  Secretary. 

Rev.  Arthur  J.  Brown,  D.D.,  Secretary. 

T.  H.  P.  Sailer,  Ph.D.,  Educational  Secretary. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  OF  THE  REFORMED  CHURCTI  IN 
AMERICA, 

President  W.  H.  S.  Demarest,  D.D. 

Rev.  William  I.  Chamberlain,  Ph.D.,  Foreign  Secretary. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  OF  THE  REFORMED  CHURCH  IN 
THE  UNITED  STATES, 

Rev.  A.  R.  Bartholomew,  D.D.,  Secretary. 

A.  D.  WoLFiNGER,  Secretary. 

BOARD  OF  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  OF  THE  UNITED  PRESBYTERIAN 
CHURCH  OF  N.  A., 

Rev.  M.  G.  Kyle,  D.D.,  President. 

Rev.  Charles  R.  Watson,  D.D.,  Corresponding  and  Candidate  Secretary. 
W.  B.  Anderson,  Associate  Secretary. 

AMERICAN  COUNCIL,  AFRICA  INLAND  MISSION, 

Frank  H.  Mann,  Secretary. 

STUDENT  DEPARTMENT,  INTERNATIONAL  COMMITTEE  OF 
YOUNG  MEN’S  CHRISTIAN  ASSOCIATIONS, 

Rev.  Paul  Micou,  Secretary  for  Theological  Seminaries. 

FOREIGN  DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  NATIONAL  BOARD  OF  THE 
YOUNG  WOMEN’S  CHRISTIAN  ASSOCIATION,  U.  S.  A., 

Miss  Bertha  Conde. 

Miss  Clarissa  H.  Spencer. 

CHRISTIAN  AND  MISSIONARY  ALLIANCE, 

Rev.  J.  D.  Williams,  Foreign  Secretary. 

STUDENT  VOLUNTEER  MOVEMENT  FOR  FOREIGN  MISSIONS, 
Fennell  P.  Turner,  General  Secretary. 

Joseph  C.  Robbins,  Candidate  Secretary. 

TRUSTEES  OF  THE  CANTON  CHRISTIAN  COLLEGE, 

W.  Henry  Grant,  Secretary  and  Treasurer. 

TRUSTEES  OF  THE  SYRIAN  PROTESTANT  COLLEGE, 

Rev.  Francis  Brown,  D.D. 

CONTINUATION  COMMITTEE  OF  THE  WORLD  MISSIONARY  CON- 
FERENCE, 

John  R,  Mott,  LL.D.,  Chairman. 

57 


DOMINION  COUNCIL  OF  THE  YOUNG  WOMEN’S  CHRISTIAN  ASSO- 


CIATION, Canada, 

Miss  Una  Saunders,  National  Secretary. 

There  were  present  eight  missionaries  on  furlough. 


«« 


Rev.  Horace  E.  Coleman,  Tokyo,  Japan, 

The  Friend’s  Foreign  Missionary  Society. 

Professor  Henry  B.  Graybill,  M.A.,  Canton,  China. 
^ The  Canton  Christian  College. 


Rev.  S.  G.  Inman,  Mexico, 

Secretary  Committee  on  Co-operation  in  Latin  America. 

Rev.  Edmund  J.  Lee,  Nanking,  China, 

The  Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the  Protestant  EpiS' 
copal  Church. 


Dr.  B.  L.  Lockett,  Oyo,  Nigeria,  South  Africa, 

^ The  Southern  Baptist  Convention. 

Rev.  ^ofessor  Harry  F.  Rowe,  Nanking,  China, 

The  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 


Rev.  ARTHxm  M.  Sherman,  Hankow,  China, 

'The  Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
^ copal  Church. 

Rev.  P|-ofessor  Leighton  Stuart,  Nanking,  China, 

The  Union  Theological  School  of  Nanking. 


58 


3 


